Ritual slaughter in the Netherlands – From animal to ethical meat

Posted on June 29th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: anthropology, Morocco, Public Islam, Religion Other.

Update: see below

The Dutch banned ritual slaughtering by Muslims and Jews. In a proposal heavily condemned by Muslim and Jewish organizations the Party of the Animals wanted a complete ban on dhabiha and shechita in cases where the animals were not stunned before the killing; the ritual slaughtering by Muslims and Jews. The ban will mostly effect orthodox Jews since all of the shechita slaughtering involves animals fully conscious while in the case of dhabiba this is the case in only 25%-40%. In order to get this bill passed through the lower house of parliament (a second vote is necessary in the senate) a so-called typical Dutch compromise was established: Jewish and Muslim communities have a year to provide evidence that animals slaughtered by dhabiba and shechita (and not stunning them) do not experience more pain than those animals that are stunned before killing.

Food is much more than..just food. And even when it is just food it is of basic and existential importance to people. Many societies have food restrictions and so do many religions. Besides the Jewish and Islamic kosher and halal restrictions we have Hindu traditions pertaining to food pollution of different castes and within the Catholic tradition fish on Fridays is still (even in secular circles) a well-known phenomenon. Such food restrictions have several functions. First of all they are boundary markers; food culture practices mark who is ingroup and who is outgroup. Food practices are also reminders (and often daily reminders) to people’s moral responsibilities and obligations towards what is sacred. At the same time food is more than a reminder; it involves bodily practices and devotion as well, for example during prayer before dinner and during fasting. They also have a symbolic function in the sense that they explain, express and teach people about certain doctrines and dogmas; for example during fasting, the Eucharist and in vegetarianism. Food practices are also related to social structures of religious and ethnic groups; for example the role of the rabbi in Judaism with regard to kosher food but also differences between men and women in the production of food. And food has a very strong social function; producing and consuming food can reaffirm or even change (think about a first date with your partner) relationships with other people and there are elaborate etiquettes about how to eat. It can bring people together who may not share anything else or even have opposed understandings of the world as well as interests.

As one of my great examples in anthropology, Mary Douglas, has taught us, people distinghuish between food that is polluted (‘matter of out place’) and that which is not polluted. For example we usually do not like flies in our soup or worms in our salad. With regard to religious restrictions for food, (particular) animals are ‘out of place’. Food that is haram or not kosher is like a fly in a soup for some people. Purity and impurity should not be mixed and people should not eat impure or hybrid food; not only the fly in the soup is impure but the fly makes the whole soup impure. These food restrictions come from old (not in the sense of not modern) of what was good (even healthy) to eat and what not. At the same rituals can transform animals that are taboo into food that is allowed. It is not always clear whether these restrictions are implemented top down or bottom up; in the sense that food restrictions can also be religious legitimation of what was already common practice. Whatever is the case food ties people in contemporary society in practices, discourses and memories with their ancestors and with traditions that are larger than their individual lives in the here and now. What it comes down to is that ritual and food pertains to deeply held values, beliefs, practices and memories. For some people for example the idea of having to eat dogs, worms or insects is enough to be repulsed and shocked; the idea of having to eat other food that is taboo can invoke the same bodily reactions and emotions.

I think more or less the came can be said about food restrictions from the point of view of vegetarians and animal rights activists. This makes ‘food’ in the recent Dutch debates about ritual slaughtering a field where people battle over political, religious, economic, social and animal welfare issues. The Netherlands is now the second country to ban ritual slaughtering in recent years. Other countries such as Switzerland and the Scandinavian and Baltic countries also have bans which date from before World War II and probably not totally unrelated to anti-semitic tendencies of that time. So why now in the Netherlands?


Ritual Slaughter Controversy Unites Jews, Muslims door NewsLook

I do not think it is that speculative to say that the Animal Party has profitted from three major developments in Dutch society. First of all the animosity on ritual slaughtering is clearly related to the animosity about Islam. When the proposal for the bill was mentioned for the first time, the debate was about Islam and not about Jews.

Second the proposal and also the current result signals a change in the relation between the religious and the secular. With the current compromise the burden of proof is not on the state but on religous communities that ritual slaughtering without stunning is does not lead to animals experiencing greater pain than those that are stunned before they are killed. Given the evidence on that issue right now and because they have to show that something ‘is not’ this will be an almost impossible endeavour. In the voting in parliament the support for the Jewish and Muslim communities came largely from the three Christian parties who voted unanimously against the law. For some this is the victory of modernity and secular society over ancient or even backward religion, for the other it is attacking the freedom of religion in society and a few have even referred back to World War II when the shechita was forbidden by the Nazis. In this process both camps are created and subsequently heavily targeted. Certainly not all Muslims and Jews prefer the old way of slaughtering; some of them have spoken out, many have not and some have chosen sides with the community leaders opposing the ban. In the debate however it appears that all Muslims and Jews are against the new law. The other side is often targeted as supporters of the Freedom Party of Wilders (who struggled with this issue since the result is not only that Muslims will be targeted but also Jews and they want to uphold an image as defenders of the Jewish community and Israel; which in their rhetoric is almost the same). The idea that there may be people who are not anti-religion in general or anti-islam in particular but support the ban because they think animal welfare is more important that religious convictions, is lost somehow in the debates.

A third development may be signalling a trend that has already been set in motion when the Party for the Animals was elected in parliament several years ago. Although in many respects environmentalists are not hold high regard by the more rightist political parties and their constuencies, the Party for the Animals is regarded as a decent, somewhat atypical, party that deserves respect for its quest on animal rights. There seems to be a strong place for animal rights in Dutch society as long as it appears decent, not too left wing and outside the circles of the established parties. They are too small (two seats of out 150) to have actual power (but they are not aiming at being part of a government) but with the right timing they can gain momentum and accomplish things that would otherwise have been impossible. Whereas in the past religious groups had relatively much autonomy, and partly the case of ritual slaughtering is a remnant of that system, the Party for the Animals has now succeeded in putting animal rights first and making the regulations more state-centred.

The debate over ritual slaughtering is not over yet. Given the compromise we can have the same debate next year over the question if ritual slaughtering is good for animals (which to some people would be nonsense anyway) and also the bill has still to pass the senate. Both the supporters of the ban and certainly its opponents will continue their campaigns which will probably revolve around the three developments I have mentioned here. Until then we have some time to catch up with reading about the importance of food:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Update 14-12-2011

In a marathon meeting the Dutch senate debated the proposal on banning ritual slaughter. The conservative liberals already had withdrawn their support and last night also the social democrats rejected the proposal although their fellow party members at first supported it. (The Dutch system has two houses of debate. The senate is always the last one to debate and only has the right to approve or disapprove.) This means the proposal has been rejected.

1 comment.

PBS – Jocelyne Cesari on French Secularism

Posted on June 27th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Public Islam, Religion Other.

PBS met with prof. Jocelyne Cesari on secularism in France. She directs Harvard University’s Islam in the West program and was interviewed while in residence this year at the National War College.

Watch the full episode. See more Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly.

Below you see a small documentary with Jocelyne Cesari and others on French Secularism:

Watch the full episode. See more Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly.

Read the full transcript at the PBS page.

0 comments.

Closing the week 25 – Featuring Beyond Wilders' Free Speech

Posted on June 26th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Blogosphere, Multiculti Issues.

Most popular on Closer this week

  1. ‘Islamisering’ van Nederland
  2. Wilders on Trial VII – The dissensus ritual
  3. Open brief – Geen innovatie zonder wetenschap door Peter Paul Verbeek, Appy Sluijs en Beatrice de Graaf
  4. Egypt: After the revolution – by Samuli Schielke
  • If you want to stay updated and did not subscribe yet, you can do so HERE


Featuring Beyond Wilders’ Free Speech
Wilders acquitted of inciting hatred and discrimination
Geert Wilders: In Defense of ‘Hurtful’ Speech – WSJ.com

I was tried for a thought crime despite being an elected politician and the leader of the third-largest party in the Dutch parliament.

Wilders acquitted of hate speech against Muslims | Holy Post | National Post

Dutch populist politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims in a court ruling on Thursday that may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions over immigration policy.

The Wilders trial: Not a hater, say the judges | The Economist

THE last time he took the stand in court, Geert Wilders, the enfant terrible of Dutch politics, promised to continue speaking publicly, even if it cost him his freedom. He was visibly relieved to discover today that no such sacrifice would be demanded of him. This morning an Amsterdam court acquitted him of five counts of hate speech and discrimination.

Geert Wilders and Dutch democracy | openDemocracy

A court in the Netherlands has found the influential politician Geert Wilders innocent of charges of fomenting hatred and discrimination against Muslims. The decision is a challenge both to the rule of law and to Dutch politicians, says Cas Mudde.

Does the acquittal of Geert Wilders signal a changing Netherlands? – By Robert Zeliger | FP Passport

Wilders’s acquittal may have attracted headlines, but the truth is that the social and political ground have been shifting in the supposedly tolerant society for years. Last year, Wilders’s Party for Freedom won 15 percent of the vote in national elections, making it the third largest in parliament. And his ideas are slowly creeping into mainstream politics: The Netherlands has some of the strictest immigration laws in Europe, and has banned face-covering attire like the niqab.

BBC News – Geert Wilders cleared of hate charges by Dutch court

Supporters of Geert Wilders erupted into applause in the public gallery of the court as presiding judge Marcel van Oosten acquitted the populist politician of all charges of hate speech and discrimination against Muslims.

The World from Berlin: Wilders Acquittal a ‘Slap in the Face for Muslims’ – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International

Controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred against Muslims by a court in Amsterdam on Thursday. But the right-wing populist’s statements and the verdict have reignited the debate over free speech.

Wilders acquitted of hate speech charges | Presseurop (English)

Most Dutch newspapers are content with the verdict. NRC writes in an editorial: “Let the voters decide about the opinions and remarks of the PVV leader and let’s have the debate with him in the place where it should be: in the political arena.” Trouw supports the court’s ruling: “No one in their right mind, who feels strongly about freedom of political and social debate, hoped that he would be convicted.” The left-leaning daily De Volkskrant agrees: “Wilders’s acquittal on all points proves that freedom of speech in the Netherlands has a broad definition.”

Dutch Court Acquits Anti-Islam Politician – NYTimes.com

Ties Prakken, a lawyer who represented immigrant and antiracist complainants, agreed that “there is no appeal possible in the Netherlands,” and said she would instead bring the case to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, accusing the Dutch government of failing to protect people from incitement to discrimination or violence.

“We have a reasonable case,” Ms. Prakken said, adding, “there is some case law in our favor there.”

“It’s not only an acquittal for me,” The Associated Press quoted Mr. Wilders as telling his supporters, “but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands. Fortunately, you’re allowed to discuss Islam in public debate and you’re not muzzled in public debate. An enormous burden has fallen from my shoulders.”

Political Mavens » The Dutch escape death by strangulation

A Dutch court acquitted populist politician Geert Wilders of hate speech and discrimination last week, Associated Press reported.

Very good news, indeed.

This entire episode, in which the Netherlands’ growing Muslim population tried to tighten its stranglehold on yet another country by wrapping its own laws around its neck, can be a lesson to the world.

TFS Magnum: Free Speech Isn’t (Quite) Dead in Europe

Now the powers of political correctness will actually have to debate him on the issues instead of silencing him through the courts. (What a novel idea! Public debate of controversial ideas. What will they think of next?)

Wilders, Freedom Party and anti-islam rhetoric
The intolerance of the tolerant | openDemocracy

The advance of populist anti-Islamic forces in the liberal bastions of northern Europe – Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden – appears to reflect a betrayal of these societies’ renowned social tolerance. But there is a more subtle logic at work, says Cas Mudde.

Why Geert Wilders is not Liu Xiaobo | openDemocracy

Cas Mudde was quite right to point out recently how liberal arguments are being used in the interests of illiberal attacks on Muslims. However, in the Dutch case this reflects anything but a progressive national consensus

The Geert Wilders enigma | openDemocracy

The high-profile Dutch politician Geert Wilders is closer to mainstream centre-right politics in the Netherlands than his hardline rhetoric about Islam might suggest, says Cas Mudde.

The coordinated attack on multiculturalism | openDemocracy

David Cameron is not the only European centre-right politician to attack multiculturalism or blame mass immigration for creating pressures on the welfare state. The leaders of centre-right parties across Europe are falling over each other to denounce multiculturalism and propose a new round of protectionist measures against migrant workers.

Old and new demagoguery: the rhetoric of exclusion | openDemocracy

Right-wing populist parties tend to be anti-multinational and anti-intellectual: they endorse nationalistic, nativist, and chauvinistic beliefs, embedded – explicitly or coded – in common sense appeals to a presupposed shared knowledge of ‘the people’.

Mainstreaming Hate – By Ferry Biedermann | Foreign Policy

Geert Wilders is slowly but surely making Islamophobia an accepted element of political rhetoric in the Netherlands — and he’s got his eyes on the United States, next.

Tea Parties of the World – By Joshua E. Keating and Jared Mondschein | Foreign Policy

The populist anti-government movement might be a uniquely American phenomenon, but it’s not too hard to find its influence elsewhere.

The Dis-Integration of Europe – By Jonathan Laurence and Justin Vaïsse | Foreign Policy

European leaders are attacking ‘multiculturalism’ in a transparent ploy to appeal to far-right voters. But they’re threatening decades of progress in reaching out to Muslim minorities.

Free speech
Fighting words that are not fought « The Immanent Frame

“Under what conditions does freedom of speech become freedom to hate?” Judith Butler recently asked. Here I will explore these issues in light of recent developments concerning the freedom of speech in Norway. I will argue that applying a cosmopolitan liberal approach to freedom of speech (i.e., along U. S. First Amendment lines) in a European context in which anti-Muslim and anti-immigration discourses are becoming ever more poisonous and pervasive risks underestimating the power dynamics inherent to the practice of free speech in contemporary Europe as well as overestimating the “mainstream” political and intellectual will to mobilize against the populist right-wing’s instrumentalized Islamophobia.

To fight the xenophobic populists, we need more free speech, not less | Timothy Garton Ash | Comment is free | The Guardian

Geert Wilders should not be on trial for his words on Islam. But mainstream politicians must confront and not appease him

Poppies and Prophets « The Immanent Frame

Thus, it seems that those invested in the idea that conflicts over speech and the sacred reveal some deep and troubling incommensurability—not over whether “blasphemous” speech ought to be prohibited by the law (Mahmood does not argue for this, unlike, say, Peter Danchin), but rather over the background presuppositions about what kinds of speech can injure, how they injure, and why—are not looking broadly or carefully enough at public and legal discourse in Europe. I cannot see much difference at all between how Mahmood characterizes the injury felt by (some) pious Muslims at the defamation of the Prophet and how Judge Riddle and his witness describe the injury felt by “typical, mild-mannered” Britons at the burning of poppies during a commemorative ceremony.

Critical Inquiry — Volume 35, Number 4

Saba Mahmood
Religious Reason and Secular Affect: An Incommensurable Divide?

Any academic discussion of religion in the present moment must countenance the shrill polemics that have followed from the events of the past decade—including 9/11, the subsequent war on terror, and the rise of religious politics globally. What was once a latent schism between religious and secular worldviews has now become an incommensurable divide, and protagonists from both sides posit an ominous standoff between strong religious beliefs and secular values. Indeed, a series of international events, particularly around Islam, are often seen as further evidence of this incommensurability.
Despite this polarization, more reflective voices in the current debate have tried to show how the religious and the secular are not so much immutable essences or opposed ideologies as they are concepts that gain a particular salience with the emergence of the modern state and attendant politics—concepts that are, furthermore, interdependent and necessarily linked in their mutual transformation and historical emergence. Viewed from this perspective, as a secular rationality has come to define law, statecraft, knowledge production, and economic relations in the modern world, it has also simultaneously transformed the conceptions, ideals, practices, and institutions of religious life. Secularism here is understood not simply as the doctrinal separation of the church and the state but the rearticulation of religion in a manner that is commensurate with modern sensibilities and modes of governance. To rethink the religious is also to rethink the secular and its truth-claims, its promise of internal and external goods.

The Right to Ridicule by Ronald Dworkin | The New York Review of Books

The British and most of the American press have been right, on balance, not to republish the Danish cartoons that millions of furious Muslims protested against in violent and terrible destruction around the world. Reprinting would very likely have meant—and could still mean—more people killed and more property destroyed. It would have caused many British and American Muslims great pain because they would have been told by other Muslims that the publication was intended to show contempt for their religion, and though that perception would in most cases have been inaccurate and unjustified, the pain would nevertheless have been genuine. True, readers and viewers who have been following the story might well have wanted to judge the cartoons’ impact, humor, and offensiveness for themselves, and the press might therefore have felt some responsibility to provide that opportunity. But the public does not have a right to read or see whatever it wants no matter what the cost, and the cartoons are in any case widely available on the Internet.

Harvard Law Review: Dignity and Defamation: The Visibility of Hate

In his three 2009 Holmes Lectures published here, Professor Waldron seeks to describe and defend laws forbidding group defamation — what we commonly refer to as “hate speech” — as affirming the basic dignity of each member of society. Part I defends the characterization of hate speech as group defamation. It argues that hate speech impugns its victims’ standing as equal members of society. Part II describes hate speech regulation as the protection of a fragile public good: the assurance offered by each member of society to all of its members that they can live free of fear, discrimination, violence, and the like. Part III defends the views articulated in Parts I and II from various criticisms, particularly those of Professor Ronald Dworkin. Dworkin argues that forbidding hate speech may result in a loss of democratic legitimacy for other laws. But Professor Waldron argues that with sufficient safeguards the loss is vanishingly small, and well worth the concomitant gains. As well, prohibitions on hate speech should only extend to issues that are “settled,” such as race, rather than issues that are currently controversial, which should further allay concerns that hate speech regulation will foreclose freedom or democratic debate.

Op-Ed Contributor – Totally Tolerant, Up to a Point – NYTimes.com

IF it were not for his hatred of Islam, Geert Wilders would have remained a provincial Dutch parliamentarian of little note.

Is Critique Secular? : Talal Asad, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, and Saba Mahmood – University of California Press

In this volume, four leading thinkers of our times confront the paradoxes and dilemmas attending the supposed stand-off between Islam and liberal democratic values. Taking the controversial Danish cartoons of Mohammad as a point of departure, Talal Asad, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, and Saba Mahmood inquire into the evaluative frameworks at stake in understanding the conflicts between blasphemy and free speech, between religious taboos and freedoms of thought and expression, and between secular and religious world views. Is the language of the law an adequate mechanism for the adjudication of such conflicts? What other modes of discourse are available for the navigation of such differences in multicultural and multi-religious societies? What is the role of critique in such an enterprise? These are among the pressing questions this volume addresses.

That’s Offensive!: Criticism, Identity, Respect, Collini

That’s Offensive! examines the common assertion that to criticize someone else’s deeply held ideas or beliefs is inherently offensive. This idea, Stefan Collini argues, is unfortunately reinforced by two of the central requirements of an enlightened global politics: treating all people with equal respect and trying to avoid words or deeds that compound existing social disadvantages. In this powerfully argued book, Collini identifies a confused form of relativism and a well-meaning condescension at the heart of such attitudes. Instead, Collini suggests that one of the most profound ways to show our respect for other people is by treating them as capable of engaging in reasoned argument and thus as equals in intellect and humanity.

Misc.Wilders’ trial
Editorial: Freedom to abuse? – Arab News

Where is Europe headed? With every passing day, the continent appears to walk back into the Middle Ages, surrendering its much-acclaimed freedom of faith and multiculturalism. The acquittal of Dutch politician Geert Wilders on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims has come as a shock to Muslims around the world.

The legal boundaries of Dutch insults – Features – Al Jazeera English

Legal experts also expressed their doubt whether “a political debate” belonged in a courtroom. When the charges were pressed, the public prosecution refused to pursue Wilders saying it did not believe in a successful outcome to this case, however insulting Wilders’ remarks were seen to be.

Misc.
Rape in wartime: Listening to the victims – CNN.com

This is the first of two stories focusing on rape as a tool of war. The second story looks at the untold stories of rape in the Holocaust. Both stories contain graphic language; discretion is advised.

Silence lifted: The untold stories of rape during the Holocaust – CNN.com

This is the second of two stories focusing on rape as a tool of war.

Non-violence and the narrative of peace | Joseph Dana

Mainstream Israeli and international media argued endlessly, as though in a state of reverie, about whether Palestinian demonstrators who threw rocks should be considered unarmed, non-violent or violent. Absent from the conversation was the fact that Israel is rapidly increasing a programme of military repression against demonstrations in a last-ditch effort to dominate the narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

EGYPT: Muslim Brotherhood youth break away to form new political party « altahrir, news of Islam, Muslims

The Muslim Brotherhood is struggling with more dissent in its ranks after a group of young members broke away from the Islamist organization’s political party to form a secular party that is more inclusive of other cultures and religions.

A moment before boarding the next flotilla – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

I’d rather use my influence and power, in concert with other members of American civil society, to actively and nonviolently resist policies I consider abominable.

Egypt: The Victorious Islamists by Yasmine El Rashidi | The New York Review of Books

Stéphane Lacroix, a scholar of Wahabism and Islamist movements, spent a large part of last year in Egypt researching the Salafi movement, and he has close relations with prominent Islamists. In early June he described intimate meetings and dinners he’d just had with some of the Salafist leaders. “In many ways the Salafi battle has been won,” he said. “Certainly the conservative one has. To people like Abou Elela Mady”—the leader of the al-Wasat party—”it’s a question of which of the conservatives can win more votes.”

Shady politics of GayMiddleEast

In both cases Queer Arab and African voices are being co-opted by white men. With the help of a handfull of collaborators both on the continent and in the Diaspora they continually attempt to discredit our voices but worse grossly undermine grassroots struggles and take credit for any successes and acts of resistance. Queer African voices like our Queer Arab sisters and brothers..

The true definition of “Terrorist” – Glenn Greenwald – Salon.com

In late May, two Iraqi nationals, who were in the U.S. legally, were arrested in Kentucky and indicted on a variety of Terrorism crimes. In The Washington Post today, GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — writing under the headline: “Guantanamo is the place to try terrorists” — castigates Attorney General Eric Holder for planning to try the two defendants in a civilian court on U.S. soil rather than shipping them to Guantanamo.

Culture clash over ritual slaughter ban | Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Two traditions clashed in the Dutch parliament on Wednesday evening: religious tolerance versus animal rights. The one rooted in centuries of Dutch history, the other a new development that seems to have rapidly become an element of 21st-century Dutch identity.

Dutch
Zo simpel is het! « Wat Je Zegt Ben Je Zelf!

Eindelijk heb ik dan de schuldige gevonden. De teleurstelling is schuldig. Ik heb hiermee ook bewezen dat een freaking GeenStijl-stuk het makkelijkste is wat er te schrijven is. Geef maar iets de schuld en verzin er een verhaal om heen. Al heb ik het nog te veel onderbouwd voor GeenStijl begrippen. De helft van de mensen slikt het toch wel voor zoete koek. Ze sluiten zich allemaal achter je aan. Niemand weet of ik het meen of niet! Een gedeelte zou mij verrot schelden. Er is ook een gedeelte wat mij gelijk gaat geven. Zo is de ster geboren. Of ik meen wat hier boven staat? Voor jullie een vraag voor mij een weet!

Sheikh Fawaz over oordeel rechtbank

Sheikh Fawaz heeft in zijn vrijdagpreek een reactie gegeven op het oordeel van de rechtbank in de zaak Wilders. De Sheikh vindt het oordeel een belediging voor de moslims.

Filosofie Magazine : Wilders’ vrijheid of vrijheid van meningsuiting?

De democratie begon in de achttiende eeuw met praten, met een gesprek waarvan niemand werd uitgesloten. Die discussie tussen gelijken, en niet het individuele recht op vrije meningsuiting, is volgens politiek filosoof Judith Vega de absolute kern van onze democratie.

Joodse instanties willen auteur rapport ritueel slachten horen :: nrc.nl

Bij het debat over het verbod op onverdoofd ritueel slachten speelde ‘het rapport van de universiteit van Wageningen’ een prominente rol. Joodse instanties willen de auteur nu onder ede horen over hoe het tot stand is gekomen.

‘Dierenrechten worden steeds belangrijker’ – Raoul Du Pré – VK

De politieke kracht van het verbod op de rituele slacht is vooral de symboolwaarde: dierenrechten winnen terrein.

SMN teleurgesteld over uitspraak rechter in zaak-Wilders

Het SMN is zeer teleurgesteld in de uitspraak van de rechter in de strafzaak tegen PVV-voorman Geert Wilders. We respecteren de uitspraak van de rechter, maar constateren ook dat de anti-moslim uitspraken van Wilders blijkbaar juridisch toelaatbaar zijn. Dat is teleurstellend. Het SMN vindt dat op basis van uitlatingen van de heer Wilders, er grond was om te worden veroordeeld voor discriminatie en aanzetten tot haat.

Marokkaans Netwerk: “De Nederlandse rechtsstaat is in gevaar”

Het Nederlands/Marokkaans Netwerk tegen racisme en voor sociale cohesie heeft met grote teleurstelling en verbazing kennis genomen van de uitspraak door de rechtbank in de zaak tegen Wilders. Dat laat het Netwerk weten in een persbericht.

Het Netwerk schrijft:” De Marokkaanse gemeenschap is verontrust over de uitspraak, die zal leiden tot een grotere verdeeldheid, meer islamofobie en verdergaande polarisatie. Moslims en andere minderheden zullen nog meer schade gaan ondervinden van de uitspraken van Wilders, die blijkbaar onbestraft gedaan kunnen worden.”

Etnische diversiteit versterkt sociale banden

Op basis van eerder onderzoek in de VS werd tot nu toe verondersteld dat mensen in etnisch diverse samenlevingen minder nauwe banden met anderen onderhouden. Ook zouden ze minder deelnemen aan het sociale leven. Onderzoek gefinancierd door de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) wijst nu echter uit dat de aanwezigheid van niet-Westerse immigranten in Europa geen negatieve gevolgen heeft op de banden tussen mensen. Integendeel: de aanwezigheid van immigranten in een regio komt ten goede aan de sociale banden tussen de mensen in die regio.
Het NWO-onderzoek is in juni gepubliceerd is in het tijdschrift Social Science Research.

Een toename van immigranten in een regio leidt er toe dat autochtonen meer allochtone vrienden en collega’s krijgen. Dit soort contact heeft weer een positieve uitwerking op het onderhouden van nauwe banden met andere autochtonen, ontdekten de onderzoekers.

Sociale Vraagstukken » Integratienota negeert bestaande waarden

Minister Donner gaat met zijn integratienota voorbij aan de al jarenlange stabiele steun van Nederlanders voor de multiculturele samenleving. De opvattingen van autochtonen zijn anders dan de scherpe toon van het publieke debat suggereert.

RTV Utrecht: “Hartelijk gesprek met leerlingen Bilalschool”

Leerlingen van groep 7 van de Amersfoortse Bilalschool hebben vandaag een gesprek gehad met nabestaanden uit de rouwstoet die zij eerder deze week verstoorden. Dat gesprek was open en hartelijk, staat in een persbericht van school en nabestaanden.

Bij het incident waren enkele leerlingen van de basisschool betrokken, alhoewel de beledigende opmerkingen door andere kinderen zouden zijn gemaakt. Er wordt door de school verder onderzoek gedaan.

0 comments.

Closing the week 25 – Featuring Beyond Wilders’ Free Speech

Posted on June 26th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Blogosphere, Multiculti Issues.

Most popular on Closer this week

  1. ‘Islamisering’ van Nederland
  2. Wilders on Trial VII – The dissensus ritual
  3. Open brief – Geen innovatie zonder wetenschap door Peter Paul Verbeek, Appy Sluijs en Beatrice de Graaf
  4. Egypt: After the revolution – by Samuli Schielke
  • If you want to stay updated and did not subscribe yet, you can do so HERE


Featuring Beyond Wilders’ Free Speech
Wilders acquitted of inciting hatred and discrimination
Geert Wilders: In Defense of ‘Hurtful’ Speech – WSJ.com

I was tried for a thought crime despite being an elected politician and the leader of the third-largest party in the Dutch parliament.

Wilders acquitted of hate speech against Muslims | Holy Post | National Post

Dutch populist politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims in a court ruling on Thursday that may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions over immigration policy.

The Wilders trial: Not a hater, say the judges | The Economist

THE last time he took the stand in court, Geert Wilders, the enfant terrible of Dutch politics, promised to continue speaking publicly, even if it cost him his freedom. He was visibly relieved to discover today that no such sacrifice would be demanded of him. This morning an Amsterdam court acquitted him of five counts of hate speech and discrimination.

Geert Wilders and Dutch democracy | openDemocracy

A court in the Netherlands has found the influential politician Geert Wilders innocent of charges of fomenting hatred and discrimination against Muslims. The decision is a challenge both to the rule of law and to Dutch politicians, says Cas Mudde.

Does the acquittal of Geert Wilders signal a changing Netherlands? – By Robert Zeliger | FP Passport

Wilders’s acquittal may have attracted headlines, but the truth is that the social and political ground have been shifting in the supposedly tolerant society for years. Last year, Wilders’s Party for Freedom won 15 percent of the vote in national elections, making it the third largest in parliament. And his ideas are slowly creeping into mainstream politics: The Netherlands has some of the strictest immigration laws in Europe, and has banned face-covering attire like the niqab.

BBC News – Geert Wilders cleared of hate charges by Dutch court

Supporters of Geert Wilders erupted into applause in the public gallery of the court as presiding judge Marcel van Oosten acquitted the populist politician of all charges of hate speech and discrimination against Muslims.

The World from Berlin: Wilders Acquittal a ‘Slap in the Face for Muslims’ – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International

Controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred against Muslims by a court in Amsterdam on Thursday. But the right-wing populist’s statements and the verdict have reignited the debate over free speech.

Wilders acquitted of hate speech charges | Presseurop (English)

Most Dutch newspapers are content with the verdict. NRC writes in an editorial: “Let the voters decide about the opinions and remarks of the PVV leader and let’s have the debate with him in the place where it should be: in the political arena.” Trouw supports the court’s ruling: “No one in their right mind, who feels strongly about freedom of political and social debate, hoped that he would be convicted.” The left-leaning daily De Volkskrant agrees: “Wilders’s acquittal on all points proves that freedom of speech in the Netherlands has a broad definition.”

Dutch Court Acquits Anti-Islam Politician – NYTimes.com

Ties Prakken, a lawyer who represented immigrant and antiracist complainants, agreed that “there is no appeal possible in the Netherlands,” and said she would instead bring the case to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, accusing the Dutch government of failing to protect people from incitement to discrimination or violence.

“We have a reasonable case,” Ms. Prakken said, adding, “there is some case law in our favor there.”

“It’s not only an acquittal for me,” The Associated Press quoted Mr. Wilders as telling his supporters, “but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands. Fortunately, you’re allowed to discuss Islam in public debate and you’re not muzzled in public debate. An enormous burden has fallen from my shoulders.”

Political Mavens » The Dutch escape death by strangulation

A Dutch court acquitted populist politician Geert Wilders of hate speech and discrimination last week, Associated Press reported.

Very good news, indeed.

This entire episode, in which the Netherlands’ growing Muslim population tried to tighten its stranglehold on yet another country by wrapping its own laws around its neck, can be a lesson to the world.

TFS Magnum: Free Speech Isn’t (Quite) Dead in Europe

Now the powers of political correctness will actually have to debate him on the issues instead of silencing him through the courts. (What a novel idea! Public debate of controversial ideas. What will they think of next?)

Wilders, Freedom Party and anti-islam rhetoric
The intolerance of the tolerant | openDemocracy

The advance of populist anti-Islamic forces in the liberal bastions of northern Europe – Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden – appears to reflect a betrayal of these societies’ renowned social tolerance. But there is a more subtle logic at work, says Cas Mudde.

Why Geert Wilders is not Liu Xiaobo | openDemocracy

Cas Mudde was quite right to point out recently how liberal arguments are being used in the interests of illiberal attacks on Muslims. However, in the Dutch case this reflects anything but a progressive national consensus

The Geert Wilders enigma | openDemocracy

The high-profile Dutch politician Geert Wilders is closer to mainstream centre-right politics in the Netherlands than his hardline rhetoric about Islam might suggest, says Cas Mudde.

The coordinated attack on multiculturalism | openDemocracy

David Cameron is not the only European centre-right politician to attack multiculturalism or blame mass immigration for creating pressures on the welfare state. The leaders of centre-right parties across Europe are falling over each other to denounce multiculturalism and propose a new round of protectionist measures against migrant workers.

Old and new demagoguery: the rhetoric of exclusion | openDemocracy

Right-wing populist parties tend to be anti-multinational and anti-intellectual: they endorse nationalistic, nativist, and chauvinistic beliefs, embedded – explicitly or coded – in common sense appeals to a presupposed shared knowledge of ‘the people’.

Mainstreaming Hate – By Ferry Biedermann | Foreign Policy

Geert Wilders is slowly but surely making Islamophobia an accepted element of political rhetoric in the Netherlands — and he’s got his eyes on the United States, next.

Tea Parties of the World – By Joshua E. Keating and Jared Mondschein | Foreign Policy

The populist anti-government movement might be a uniquely American phenomenon, but it’s not too hard to find its influence elsewhere.

The Dis-Integration of Europe – By Jonathan Laurence and Justin Vaïsse | Foreign Policy

European leaders are attacking ‘multiculturalism’ in a transparent ploy to appeal to far-right voters. But they’re threatening decades of progress in reaching out to Muslim minorities.

Free speech
Fighting words that are not fought « The Immanent Frame

“Under what conditions does freedom of speech become freedom to hate?” Judith Butler recently asked. Here I will explore these issues in light of recent developments concerning the freedom of speech in Norway. I will argue that applying a cosmopolitan liberal approach to freedom of speech (i.e., along U. S. First Amendment lines) in a European context in which anti-Muslim and anti-immigration discourses are becoming ever more poisonous and pervasive risks underestimating the power dynamics inherent to the practice of free speech in contemporary Europe as well as overestimating the “mainstream” political and intellectual will to mobilize against the populist right-wing’s instrumentalized Islamophobia.

To fight the xenophobic populists, we need more free speech, not less | Timothy Garton Ash | Comment is free | The Guardian

Geert Wilders should not be on trial for his words on Islam. But mainstream politicians must confront and not appease him

Poppies and Prophets « The Immanent Frame

Thus, it seems that those invested in the idea that conflicts over speech and the sacred reveal some deep and troubling incommensurability—not over whether “blasphemous” speech ought to be prohibited by the law (Mahmood does not argue for this, unlike, say, Peter Danchin), but rather over the background presuppositions about what kinds of speech can injure, how they injure, and why—are not looking broadly or carefully enough at public and legal discourse in Europe. I cannot see much difference at all between how Mahmood characterizes the injury felt by (some) pious Muslims at the defamation of the Prophet and how Judge Riddle and his witness describe the injury felt by “typical, mild-mannered” Britons at the burning of poppies during a commemorative ceremony.

Critical Inquiry — Volume 35, Number 4

Saba Mahmood
Religious Reason and Secular Affect: An Incommensurable Divide?

Any academic discussion of religion in the present moment must countenance the shrill polemics that have followed from the events of the past decade—including 9/11, the subsequent war on terror, and the rise of religious politics globally. What was once a latent schism between religious and secular worldviews has now become an incommensurable divide, and protagonists from both sides posit an ominous standoff between strong religious beliefs and secular values. Indeed, a series of international events, particularly around Islam, are often seen as further evidence of this incommensurability.
Despite this polarization, more reflective voices in the current debate have tried to show how the religious and the secular are not so much immutable essences or opposed ideologies as they are concepts that gain a particular salience with the emergence of the modern state and attendant politics—concepts that are, furthermore, interdependent and necessarily linked in their mutual transformation and historical emergence. Viewed from this perspective, as a secular rationality has come to define law, statecraft, knowledge production, and economic relations in the modern world, it has also simultaneously transformed the conceptions, ideals, practices, and institutions of religious life. Secularism here is understood not simply as the doctrinal separation of the church and the state but the rearticulation of religion in a manner that is commensurate with modern sensibilities and modes of governance. To rethink the religious is also to rethink the secular and its truth-claims, its promise of internal and external goods.

The Right to Ridicule by Ronald Dworkin | The New York Review of Books

The British and most of the American press have been right, on balance, not to republish the Danish cartoons that millions of furious Muslims protested against in violent and terrible destruction around the world. Reprinting would very likely have meant—and could still mean—more people killed and more property destroyed. It would have caused many British and American Muslims great pain because they would have been told by other Muslims that the publication was intended to show contempt for their religion, and though that perception would in most cases have been inaccurate and unjustified, the pain would nevertheless have been genuine. True, readers and viewers who have been following the story might well have wanted to judge the cartoons’ impact, humor, and offensiveness for themselves, and the press might therefore have felt some responsibility to provide that opportunity. But the public does not have a right to read or see whatever it wants no matter what the cost, and the cartoons are in any case widely available on the Internet.

Harvard Law Review: Dignity and Defamation: The Visibility of Hate

In his three 2009 Holmes Lectures published here, Professor Waldron seeks to describe and defend laws forbidding group defamation — what we commonly refer to as “hate speech” — as affirming the basic dignity of each member of society. Part I defends the characterization of hate speech as group defamation. It argues that hate speech impugns its victims’ standing as equal members of society. Part II describes hate speech regulation as the protection of a fragile public good: the assurance offered by each member of society to all of its members that they can live free of fear, discrimination, violence, and the like. Part III defends the views articulated in Parts I and II from various criticisms, particularly those of Professor Ronald Dworkin. Dworkin argues that forbidding hate speech may result in a loss of democratic legitimacy for other laws. But Professor Waldron argues that with sufficient safeguards the loss is vanishingly small, and well worth the concomitant gains. As well, prohibitions on hate speech should only extend to issues that are “settled,” such as race, rather than issues that are currently controversial, which should further allay concerns that hate speech regulation will foreclose freedom or democratic debate.

Op-Ed Contributor – Totally Tolerant, Up to a Point – NYTimes.com

IF it were not for his hatred of Islam, Geert Wilders would have remained a provincial Dutch parliamentarian of little note.

Is Critique Secular? : Talal Asad, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, and Saba Mahmood – University of California Press

In this volume, four leading thinkers of our times confront the paradoxes and dilemmas attending the supposed stand-off between Islam and liberal democratic values. Taking the controversial Danish cartoons of Mohammad as a point of departure, Talal Asad, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, and Saba Mahmood inquire into the evaluative frameworks at stake in understanding the conflicts between blasphemy and free speech, between religious taboos and freedoms of thought and expression, and between secular and religious world views. Is the language of the law an adequate mechanism for the adjudication of such conflicts? What other modes of discourse are available for the navigation of such differences in multicultural and multi-religious societies? What is the role of critique in such an enterprise? These are among the pressing questions this volume addresses.

That’s Offensive!: Criticism, Identity, Respect, Collini

That’s Offensive! examines the common assertion that to criticize someone else’s deeply held ideas or beliefs is inherently offensive. This idea, Stefan Collini argues, is unfortunately reinforced by two of the central requirements of an enlightened global politics: treating all people with equal respect and trying to avoid words or deeds that compound existing social disadvantages. In this powerfully argued book, Collini identifies a confused form of relativism and a well-meaning condescension at the heart of such attitudes. Instead, Collini suggests that one of the most profound ways to show our respect for other people is by treating them as capable of engaging in reasoned argument and thus as equals in intellect and humanity.

Misc.Wilders’ trial
Editorial: Freedom to abuse? – Arab News

Where is Europe headed? With every passing day, the continent appears to walk back into the Middle Ages, surrendering its much-acclaimed freedom of faith and multiculturalism. The acquittal of Dutch politician Geert Wilders on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims has come as a shock to Muslims around the world.

The legal boundaries of Dutch insults – Features – Al Jazeera English

Legal experts also expressed their doubt whether “a political debate” belonged in a courtroom. When the charges were pressed, the public prosecution refused to pursue Wilders saying it did not believe in a successful outcome to this case, however insulting Wilders’ remarks were seen to be.

Misc.
Rape in wartime: Listening to the victims – CNN.com

This is the first of two stories focusing on rape as a tool of war. The second story looks at the untold stories of rape in the Holocaust. Both stories contain graphic language; discretion is advised.

Silence lifted: The untold stories of rape during the Holocaust – CNN.com

This is the second of two stories focusing on rape as a tool of war.

Non-violence and the narrative of peace | Joseph Dana

Mainstream Israeli and international media argued endlessly, as though in a state of reverie, about whether Palestinian demonstrators who threw rocks should be considered unarmed, non-violent or violent. Absent from the conversation was the fact that Israel is rapidly increasing a programme of military repression against demonstrations in a last-ditch effort to dominate the narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

EGYPT: Muslim Brotherhood youth break away to form new political party « altahrir, news of Islam, Muslims

The Muslim Brotherhood is struggling with more dissent in its ranks after a group of young members broke away from the Islamist organization’s political party to form a secular party that is more inclusive of other cultures and religions.

A moment before boarding the next flotilla – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

I’d rather use my influence and power, in concert with other members of American civil society, to actively and nonviolently resist policies I consider abominable.

Egypt: The Victorious Islamists by Yasmine El Rashidi | The New York Review of Books

Stéphane Lacroix, a scholar of Wahabism and Islamist movements, spent a large part of last year in Egypt researching the Salafi movement, and he has close relations with prominent Islamists. In early June he described intimate meetings and dinners he’d just had with some of the Salafist leaders. “In many ways the Salafi battle has been won,” he said. “Certainly the conservative one has. To people like Abou Elela Mady”—the leader of the al-Wasat party—”it’s a question of which of the conservatives can win more votes.”

Shady politics of GayMiddleEast

In both cases Queer Arab and African voices are being co-opted by white men. With the help of a handfull of collaborators both on the continent and in the Diaspora they continually attempt to discredit our voices but worse grossly undermine grassroots struggles and take credit for any successes and acts of resistance. Queer African voices like our Queer Arab sisters and brothers..

The true definition of “Terrorist” – Glenn Greenwald – Salon.com

In late May, two Iraqi nationals, who were in the U.S. legally, were arrested in Kentucky and indicted on a variety of Terrorism crimes. In The Washington Post today, GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — writing under the headline: “Guantanamo is the place to try terrorists” — castigates Attorney General Eric Holder for planning to try the two defendants in a civilian court on U.S. soil rather than shipping them to Guantanamo.

Culture clash over ritual slaughter ban | Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Two traditions clashed in the Dutch parliament on Wednesday evening: religious tolerance versus animal rights. The one rooted in centuries of Dutch history, the other a new development that seems to have rapidly become an element of 21st-century Dutch identity.

Dutch
Zo simpel is het! « Wat Je Zegt Ben Je Zelf!

Eindelijk heb ik dan de schuldige gevonden. De teleurstelling is schuldig. Ik heb hiermee ook bewezen dat een freaking GeenStijl-stuk het makkelijkste is wat er te schrijven is. Geef maar iets de schuld en verzin er een verhaal om heen. Al heb ik het nog te veel onderbouwd voor GeenStijl begrippen. De helft van de mensen slikt het toch wel voor zoete koek. Ze sluiten zich allemaal achter je aan. Niemand weet of ik het meen of niet! Een gedeelte zou mij verrot schelden. Er is ook een gedeelte wat mij gelijk gaat geven. Zo is de ster geboren. Of ik meen wat hier boven staat? Voor jullie een vraag voor mij een weet!

Sheikh Fawaz over oordeel rechtbank

Sheikh Fawaz heeft in zijn vrijdagpreek een reactie gegeven op het oordeel van de rechtbank in de zaak Wilders. De Sheikh vindt het oordeel een belediging voor de moslims.

Filosofie Magazine : Wilders’ vrijheid of vrijheid van meningsuiting?

De democratie begon in de achttiende eeuw met praten, met een gesprek waarvan niemand werd uitgesloten. Die discussie tussen gelijken, en niet het individuele recht op vrije meningsuiting, is volgens politiek filosoof Judith Vega de absolute kern van onze democratie.

Joodse instanties willen auteur rapport ritueel slachten horen :: nrc.nl

Bij het debat over het verbod op onverdoofd ritueel slachten speelde ‘het rapport van de universiteit van Wageningen’ een prominente rol. Joodse instanties willen de auteur nu onder ede horen over hoe het tot stand is gekomen.

‘Dierenrechten worden steeds belangrijker’ – Raoul Du Pré – VK

De politieke kracht van het verbod op de rituele slacht is vooral de symboolwaarde: dierenrechten winnen terrein.

SMN teleurgesteld over uitspraak rechter in zaak-Wilders

Het SMN is zeer teleurgesteld in de uitspraak van de rechter in de strafzaak tegen PVV-voorman Geert Wilders. We respecteren de uitspraak van de rechter, maar constateren ook dat de anti-moslim uitspraken van Wilders blijkbaar juridisch toelaatbaar zijn. Dat is teleurstellend. Het SMN vindt dat op basis van uitlatingen van de heer Wilders, er grond was om te worden veroordeeld voor discriminatie en aanzetten tot haat.

Marokkaans Netwerk: “De Nederlandse rechtsstaat is in gevaar”

Het Nederlands/Marokkaans Netwerk tegen racisme en voor sociale cohesie heeft met grote teleurstelling en verbazing kennis genomen van de uitspraak door de rechtbank in de zaak tegen Wilders. Dat laat het Netwerk weten in een persbericht.

Het Netwerk schrijft:” De Marokkaanse gemeenschap is verontrust over de uitspraak, die zal leiden tot een grotere verdeeldheid, meer islamofobie en verdergaande polarisatie. Moslims en andere minderheden zullen nog meer schade gaan ondervinden van de uitspraken van Wilders, die blijkbaar onbestraft gedaan kunnen worden.”

Etnische diversiteit versterkt sociale banden

Op basis van eerder onderzoek in de VS werd tot nu toe verondersteld dat mensen in etnisch diverse samenlevingen minder nauwe banden met anderen onderhouden. Ook zouden ze minder deelnemen aan het sociale leven. Onderzoek gefinancierd door de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) wijst nu echter uit dat de aanwezigheid van niet-Westerse immigranten in Europa geen negatieve gevolgen heeft op de banden tussen mensen. Integendeel: de aanwezigheid van immigranten in een regio komt ten goede aan de sociale banden tussen de mensen in die regio.
Het NWO-onderzoek is in juni gepubliceerd is in het tijdschrift Social Science Research.

Een toename van immigranten in een regio leidt er toe dat autochtonen meer allochtone vrienden en collega’s krijgen. Dit soort contact heeft weer een positieve uitwerking op het onderhouden van nauwe banden met andere autochtonen, ontdekten de onderzoekers.

Sociale Vraagstukken » Integratienota negeert bestaande waarden

Minister Donner gaat met zijn integratienota voorbij aan de al jarenlange stabiele steun van Nederlanders voor de multiculturele samenleving. De opvattingen van autochtonen zijn anders dan de scherpe toon van het publieke debat suggereert.

RTV Utrecht: “Hartelijk gesprek met leerlingen Bilalschool”

Leerlingen van groep 7 van de Amersfoortse Bilalschool hebben vandaag een gesprek gehad met nabestaanden uit de rouwstoet die zij eerder deze week verstoorden. Dat gesprek was open en hartelijk, staat in een persbericht van school en nabestaanden.

Bij het incident waren enkele leerlingen van de basisschool betrokken, alhoewel de beledigende opmerkingen door andere kinderen zouden zijn gemaakt. Er wordt door de school verder onderzoek gedaan.

0 comments.

Wilders on Trial VII – The dissensus ritual

Posted on June 23rd, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: anthropology, Headline, Multiculti Issues.

Dutch populist anti-islam and anti-establishment politician Geert Wilders was on trial for intentionally offending a group of people based on their religion, incitement to hatred and incitement to discrimination. Today he was cleared on all charges. According to the court some of Wilders’ statements were insulting, shocking and on the edge of legal acceptibility, but should be allowed because they were made in the broad context of a political and social debate on the multi-cultural society. The interesting and complicated thing with that line of reasoning of course is that Wilders himself is constitutive of that debate; he monopolizes the debate and sets the harsh tone and scope of that debate.

The court said that talk of a tsunami of Muslims is ‘blunt and humiliating’ but ‘not subversive and does not incite to hatred or discrimination’. Furthermore, Wilders’ video Fitna could lead to feelings of hatred, but Wilders himself had not generated this feeling, the court said. Following the verdict Wilders said the ruling was a victory for freedom of speech: “I am extremely pleased and happy,” “This is not so much a win for myself, but a victory for freedom of speech. Fortunately you can criticize Islam and not be gagged in public debate.’ ‘Sometimes I meant to be coarse and denigrating,’ and: ‘In a political debate you must be able to say what you like.’
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
This blogentry gives an overview of the trial and ends by engaging with the question if this trial was a good idea to begin with.

Opening statement of Dutch MP Geerd Wilders in… door khandaniha

It all started with the announcement of the movie Fitna in November 2007. According to Wilders to movie intendend to show to violent nature of Islam and the Quran (a license to kill). The police and the public prosecutor made it relatively easy to file a complaint against the movie. Immediately after its release the first complaint was filed and the forms necessary were already there. In June 2008 the public prosecutor decided however not to proceed with the prosecution because there were no unlawful elements in the movie. A strange decision. First one stimulates (before seeing the movie) people filing complaints, and then refuse to go on with it. Strange on behalf of the public prosecutor and one might add not very good for keeping confidence in the judiciary system because it stirs up things and leads people into a dead end. In January 2009 the Amsterdam appeals court orderded prosecutors to put Wilders on trial since ‘in a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to draw a clear line’. The court’s decision to prosecute is also in line with a previous decision in which a particular statement was not seen as inciting on its own, but it did within the particular context it was made. Other groups (including the people who made the complaints, a wide range of actors ranging from lawyers to one of the Salafi mosques in the Netherlands) have tried to frame it as incitement to hatred, insulting a religious group AND blashpemy. The latter however was turned down. The law on blasphemy is very strict and it is not even clear if making insulting comments about the prophet Muhammad is liable. See for more juridical details the brief by my Radboud University colleague Ybo Buruma. Framing it as blasphemy can be seen as attempt by religious status quo the protect the existing status quo, while making a movie bound to be experienced as blasphemous can be seen as an attack on that status quo. The same line of reasoning can be made with regard to incitement to hatred and discrimination and insulting a religious group. In both cases people want to defend their group from attacks that might be disruptive and threatening to the integrity of the group.

Framing the trial

How is the trial sold to the public? As said above, the authorities view the general in terms of ‘general interest to draw a clear line’. It appears to be self-evident that drawing a clear line is a good thing. One can wonder about that. The decision not to prosecute was made because of the context of the public debate in which the film was made which (needs to) leave room for people to make strong statements. In both cases we can see the reaction of the authorities as an attempt to de-politicize the whole issue by bringing it in and out and in again in the judicial system. This of course does not work. Wilders frames it different and contrary to the views of the authorities as a political trial meant to silence a politician who stands up for Dutch culture against the dangers from a violent and intolerant Islam that threatens to sweep the country. Wilders statement at the end of the trial gives a nice idea of how he framed the trial while the next video offers a glimpse of his ideas:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

The Argument
The defense Wilders has put up in trial is that he is just speaking out on the truth about Islam. They called several so-called expert witnesses including Wafa Sultan. Like the other witnesses before her, Wafa Sultan claims Islam is essentially a violent religion striving to conquer and submit the free world. She is not against Muslims as she claims (like Wilders does as well) but the question of a particular Muslim is dangerous depends (in her view) about how deep their religiosity is. If, according to her, the person is very pious and so on, then (given the violent nature of Islamic teachings) the person is dangerous. If the person however appears not to be very pious, one still has to consider the possibility that he is playing tricks and deceives you with his moderate outlook. Anthropologist Gabriele Marranci has explained quite clear why that argument does not add up (see also HERE).Rhetoric such as this reduces the multidimensionality of the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims, making one dimension all-encompassing and primordial while obscuring other dimensions and their mutual influences. Islam as a threat is a collective action frame, aimed at mobilizing people is constructed in order to influence people’s perception of particular events and meanings attributed to those events. If one applies it often enough and when it resonates among people because it appears to be logical and self-evident given particular processes and events people have experienced, such framing works as a mental shortcut that provides people with an effective and efficient way to deal with information. It is a form of persuasive communication used by political and religious elites prior to and during conflicts attempting to mobilize people for collective action. In this case the idea of Islam as a threat is the central organizing idea by which particular incidents and statements are qualified as examples of Islamization. Wilders’ statement in court was very important in this regard. The new government backed by Wilders’ PVV, wanted to build bridges and has as a motto: Freedom and Responsibility. Wilders stated that this motto was not his and ‘I’m not really a building-bridges-type-of-guy’. The other central organizing idea is ‘freedom’ but he talks about a particular kind of freedom. It pertains to freedom of the supporters of the Freedom Party and its MP’s. It pertains to a freedom from governmental interference and being liberated from the totalitarian and intolerant Islam and at the expense of (Muslim) minorities that are neglected and marginalized.

The prosecutor
As was to be expected a little bit the prosecutor sought acquittal on all points of the charge. Maybe surprising for outsiders but note that prosecutors initially declined to press charges against Wilders in June 2008. Prosecutors told the court that Wilders’ statements may be “hurtful” or “insulting” to Muslims, but there was insufficient proof to convict him of trying to polarize Dutch society into antagonistic groups. He has never called for violence. In the summation, prosecutor said Wilders’ statements were made as part of the public debate “about the immigration and integration of nonwestern foreigners, especially Muslims.” “Standpoints can vary considerably and emotions can run high, but … it is a debate that it must be possible to have,” she said.

In one example cited by prosecutors, Wilders wrote in a 2007 opinion piece: “I’ve had enough of Islam in the Netherlands; let not one more Muslim immigrate,” and urged that the Quran be banned. The prosecutors said that statement, like others, was within the legal bounds of public debate. Many of Wilders’ statements seemed to denounce Islam as an ideology or its the growing influence in the Netherlands, rather than being intended as an abuse of Muslims as a people or group, according to the prosecutor. At the end of the day Wilders stated in the first trial “I don’t insult, I don’t incite hate, I don’t discriminate,” he said outside the courtroom afterward. “The only thing I do, and will keep on doing, is speaking the truth.” (copied from Yahoo! News). According to RNW:

Wilders off the hook | Radio Netherlands Worldwide

The prosecutors based their arguments on a few basic principles. In the first place, there is little jurisprudence in Dutch law to fall back on, particularly in the cases of incitement. The jurisprudence on the European level is somewhat broader, including recent cases decided by the European Court of Human Rights against Jean
Marie le Pen in France, and Daniel Féret in Belgium. The lawyers cited both cases, as well as a few cases in Dutch courts.

In addition, prosecutors maintained a very close, cautious reading ofthe law. Statements have to meet very specific criteria to be considered incitement. This is particularly true in the case of a politician taking part in a national debate.

The whole process was quite muddled and in October an appellate court ordered a re-trial that started in February. The important thing is to understand the different historic trajectories underlying the current state of affairs regarding free speech. It is in particular the perceived social evils that constitute the bases of the complaints against Wilders. Because we are in a court system, the way to address these social evils is to demonstrate that people are harmed by it. It is the principle of harm that makes people having to account for their choice (how) to express themselves. This is what the plaintiffs tried to do and they asked for a guilty verdict and a symbolic damages award of 1 euro.

Freedom and Power: dissensus ritual

Now was this trial a good idea to begin with? Many commentators think it wasn’t as for example David Poort shows in a recent Al Jazeera article. Part of the comments there are correct of course. Whatever the outcome Wilders will not stop his extremist message nor will the debate about the limits of freedom of speech be over. And yes probably the fact that Wilders continues to challenge the limits is one of the things many people like so much about him. And yes, a court room may not be the most suitable place for a public debate. Furthermore it is often pointed out that Wilders is criticizing Islam, not the people, and since Islam is not a race nor an ethnicity, the discrimination laws do (or should) not apply. Nevertheless some of Wilders’ remarks on Muslims or calling Islam a ‘desert religion’ clearly uses racialized stereotyping and framing. Also particular cultural markers (such as headscarves) may not be racial but in the debates they can become racialized. This can happen because, although Islam is not a race indeed, Wilders is in fact racializing Islam by seeing it as an immutable and all pervasive category that drives people to intolerant acts. Furthermore besides the Islam-card he also plays the nativism card in which the native Dutch population is also seen as an immutable category constituting a moral community based upon judeo-christian values; a moral community that is in fact white. Furthermore Wilders did, albeit in an indirect manner, incite to violence and hatred by stating about Islam “It is a violent ideology like communism and fascism and we should deal with it that way“. Now how exactly did ‘we’ deal with communism and fascism? Certainly not (only) by drinking tea with communists and fascists.

But there is more to it. During the last years Muslim activists have sought a way to adress their public views in a number of ways; from violent to peaceful and from petitions to demonstrations. Most of it not very effective and sometimes (the murder of Theo van Gogh) with considerable backlash against Muslim communities. The calm reaction of Muslims after the movie Fitna was praised and by some like Hirsi Ali seen as a sign that provocation actually works. By engaging a court case Muslim organisations (including a Salafi mosque) have stepped into ritual of court cases; a ritual that can offer a temporary solution to a complex and difficult political situation and that should transform a tense situation (as was clearly the case with Fitna) into a more balanced situation. It seems however that the whole trial did not lead to balance and social integration of conflictual standpoints, but to dissensus. We can think of other court cases that in similar ways appear to be dissensus rituals such as the US OJ Simpson trial as James Carey has suggested. A dissensus ritual does not (at least not immediately) lead to social integration but to a focus of the public on the existence of social crises and the escalation of such crisis. Relevant questions in this sense are: Does the trial and its verdict have any bearing on establishing, expressing and clarifying the new secularist order in this country? How are religious arguments viewed and how do religious group adjust to secular language in order to defend their claims? The other thing is how secularism plays a role here. The freedom of speech is a secular freedom, but how is it politically used by groups to mobilise people and legitimate their political actions? What does the politicization of the freedom of speech mean and what disciplining aspects play a role? And how does all of this more specific to (debates about) Islam in society? A next issue pertains to ‘group’ (a category used in the complaints). A group is not a thing in and of itself, groups are created for example by speaking about offending a ‘religious group’. The group is constructed on the basis of adherence to a religion, notwithstanding the fact that many people who filed complaints are not Muslim or religious at all. How does the notion of freedom of speech play a role in construction of a group as a coherent, cleary defined category of people?

The distinction between integration rituals and dissensus rituals however is not that strong as anthropologists have shown over and over again. Relegating the conflict between Wilders’ PVV and its supporters on the one hand and Muslims and anti-racism organisations on the other hand, and the state supposedly somewhere in the middle, decreases the conflictual aspects. It confirms that the natural order of how conflicts should be solved in this country is either by trial or by political debate. As such it establishes and reinforces a hierarchical order of how people should respond to the world. This order is not the same as years ago. In the 1990s Janmaat, a right wing leader, was convicted for wanting to abolish multicultural society; nowadays many people feel that conviction was wrong and, moreover, mainstream politicians have declared the failure of multiculturalism over and over again.

When rituals can establish a hierarchical order, power comes into play of course. As Friedman makes clear that not everyone has equal power in deciding what particular words mean. Wilders claims that his freedom his attacked by the trial; for the people who started the trial with their complaints (Muslims and non-Muslims) it is a strategy to have a stronger position in the negotiations over what is  allowed in contemporary society and what is not. For Wilders it is a (forced) attempt to remain master over his own words. Ultimately, as Friedman also makes clear, it is the state who decides in the trial. The fact that many, even those opposing Wilders, deplored that Muslims and others went to trial (and forced the state to do this) is very interesting in this regard. For some it is about warding off the power of the state for others it is concerning that Muslims can actually have power by exercising their rights or by what has been a called a ‘legal jihad‘. And I think here we encounter a problem with the trial against Wilders. The state has shown a reluctant attitude in this trial; first by not wanting to go to trial at all and second (after being forced to go to trial) by seeking acquittal on all charges. It is as if there is a ritual going on but one of the performers is reluctantly playing its part in the performance. This is detrimental for the function of the ritual in many ways. To name a few, it could give people the impression that, according to the state, politicians (such as Wilders) are above the law. It could also give migrants and Muslims (not for the first time) the impression that the state doesn’t really care about protecting them against hate speech and discrimination.

Look for example at the reactions of Moroccan and Muslims spokespersons after the acquittal of Wilders today:

Farid Azarkan of the SMN association of Moroccans in the Netherlands said he feared the acquittal could further split Dutch society and encourage others to repeat Wilders’ comments.

“You see that people feel more and more supported in saying that minorities are good for nothing,” Azarkan said.

“Wilders has said very extreme things about Muslims and Moroccans, so when will it ever stop? Some will feel this as a sort of support for what they feel and as justification.”

Minorities groups said they would now take the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing the ruling meant the Netherlands had failed to protect ethnic minorities from discrimination.

“The acquittal means that the right of minorities to remain free of hate speech has been breached. We are going to claim our rights at the U.N.,” said Mohamed Rabbae of the National Council for Moroccans.

This in particular important because there seems to be a double standard at work here. When the Muhammad cartoons affair occurred a few years ago the Belgian Arab-European League (AEL) came up with cartoons that, for example, depicted Adolf Hitler and Anne Frank in bed together. They wanted to show the double standard that was being applied according to them with regard to cartoons referring to Islam and those referring to the Holocaust and the Jews. According to the appellate court however they (after initially a lower court saw no problem in the cartoons)the cartoons were more grieving than necessary for the public debate over the issue of double standards and they had to pay a fine. Unlike the Wilders trial the AEL trial wasn’t a major public and political event and (given the appeal) the prosecutor did its job. It appears that the current debates are so limitless and the behaviour of politicians and opinion leaders in the debate about Muslims and Islam is so blunt to the say the least, without anyone having enough authority among all parties to set some boundaries, that going to court is indeed the only way left to establish some limits. It is clear that the public prosecutor has an important role in that but the way it has operated here may even lead to even less authority for them.

1 comment.

Open Brief – Geen innovatie zonder wetenschap

Posted on June 20th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: anthropology, Guest authors, Headline, State of Science.

Guest Authors:
Peter-Paul Verbeek
Appy Sluijs
Beatrice de Graaf

Topteams

In de komende maanden worden cruciale politieke besluiten genomen over de toekomst van het wetenschappelijk onderzoek in Nederland. Nederland lijdt aan een zogeheten innovatieparadox: er wordt veel wetenschappelijk onderzoek gedaan, maar dat creëert onvoldoende economische kansen. Er zijn daarom negen ‘topteams’ gevormd die binnen negen ‘topsectoren’ plannen ontwikkelen om wetenschappelijk onderzoek en innovatie beter op elkaar te laten aansluiten. Komende week presenteren deze teams hun plannen aan de bewindspersonen.

Innovatieparadox

Volgens het Nederlands Observatorium van Wetenschap en Technologie (NOWT) is één van de oorzaken van de innovatieparadox de achterblijvende samenwerking van Nederlandse innovatieve bedrijven met universiteiten en onderzoeksinstellingen. Het valt dan ook te prijzen dat de regering deze situatie wil verbeteren. Maar daarbij mag niet vergeten worden dat fundamenteel wetenschappelijk onderzoek in veel gevallen de motor achter innovatie is.

Antropologisch onderzoek naar kannibalisme in Papoea Nieuw Guinea leidde bijvoorbeeld tot de ontdekking van de prionziektes (Nobelprijs 1976 en 1997), waartoe ook de gekkekoeienziekte behoort. Onderzoek naar atoomkernspinresonantie wordt tegenwoordig gebruikt in MRI’s. Taalkundig onderzoek leidde tot automatische spraakherkenners. Onderzoek naar magnetische lagen leverde nu onmisbare hardware voor computers op. Zulk onderzoek verbetert de kwaliteit van leven en onze materiële mogelijkheden. Stuk voor stuk laten deze voorbeelden zien dat innovaties doorgaans op onvoorspelbare manieren ontstaan uit fundamenteel wetenschappelijk onderzoek. In de huidige plannen zou een aanzienlijk deel van de budgetten van de twee belangrijkste spelers in het fundamentele onderzoek in Nederland – de Nederlandse organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), en de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen (KNAW) – moeten worden besteed binnen de negen aangewezen gebieden. Gegeven het belang van het fundamenteel wetenschappelijk onderzoek is het cruciaal dat deze operatie met grote zorg wordt uitgevoerd.

Excellente output door wetenschap

Volgens het NOWT presteren wetenschappers in Nederland excellent op output in publicaties (2e in de wereld) en op impact van die publicaties (4e in de wereld). Dat is overigens vooral het gevolg van investeringen in het verleden. Ruimte om het budget verder af te romen is er niet: nu al besteedt de Nederlandse staat slechts 0.8% van het BNP aan wetenschap, flink minder dan andere westerse landen, en aanzienlijk lager dan het in de EU afgesproken streefcijfer. De geplande verschuiving van budgetten van fundamenteel naar toepassingsgericht onderzoek betekent dat we een kwalitatief zeer goed systeem (wetenschap) aantasten in een poging een minder goed werkend systeem (innovatie) te verbeteren. Dat kan geen goede ontwikkeling zijn voor een land dat wil opklimmen in de ranglijst van kenniseconomieën.

Wat is dan wel nodig voor structureel succesvolle innovatie?

De basis is het creëren en in stand houden van een vruchtbare voedingsbodem. Dat begint bij creativiteit, durf en een onderzoekende geest: eigenschappen die bij uitstek worden getraind door de uitdaging van fundamenteel toponderzoek. Ten tweede dient het beleid zich op de juiste tijdschaal te richten. Er zitten doorgaans tientallen jaren tussen een doorbraak in onderzoek en de maatschappelijke en/of economische impact daarvan. En dus moeten er structureel langetermijninvesteringen gedaan worden in fundamenteel onderzoek. Ten derde is er breedte nodig. Het is onvoorspelbaar uit welke velden belangrijke innovaties zullen komen, zoals duidelijk werd uit bovengenoemde voorbeelden. Die breedte strekt zich nadrukkelijk uit tot sociaalwetenschappelijk en geesteswetenschappelijk onderzoek. Innovatie betaalt zich niet alleen uit in direct economisch nut, maar ook in indirect kapitaal, zoals sociaal-maatschappelijke, juridische of culturele vooruitgang.

Creëren van vruchtbare koppelingen tussen wetenschap en bedrijfsleven

De oplossing voor de innovatieparadox ligt daarom niet in het eenzijdig overhevelen van middelen van fundamenteel naar toepassingsgericht onderzoek, maar in het creëren van vruchtbare koppelingen tussen wetenschap en bedrijfsleven. Dat kan op twee manieren. Allereerst zou een deel van de gelden voor de topsectoren geoormerkt moeten worden voor fundamenteel onderzoek, gekoppeld aan de domeinen van de topsectoren en onder auspiciën van NWO en KNAW. Zo blijft er een dynamische en vruchtbare poule van wetenschappelijk onderzoek bestaan, die misschien niet onmiddellijk ‘nuttig’ is, maar wel een onuitputtelijke bron voor innovatie blijft. Bovendien kunnen we alleen op die manier (buitenlands) talent werven en vasthouden.

Ten tweede is het van belang dat het bedrijfsleven zélf investeert in innovatie. De cijfers van het NOWT laten zien dat het bedrijfsleven slechts 1.0% van het BNP investeert in Research and Development (R&D). Volgens de Europese norm zou deze investering twee keer zo hoog moeten zijn – sterke economieën blijken nog veel meer te investeren om concurrerend te zijn. Er zijn overigens uitzonderingen: het Nederlandse hightech bedrijf ASML investeert bijvoorbeeld jaarlijks zo’n 500 miljoen euro in R&D en verdient hier goed aan. ASML valt binnen een Topsector, zoals veel andere bedrijven waarvan de R&D investeringen prima op peil zijn. Dit roept de vraag op of extra overheidsgelden in deze gevallen nodig zijn en tot meer innovatie zullen leiden. Misschien belemmeren zulke gelden juist private investeringen in R&D.

Creatief en innovatief onderzoekstalent, bottom up faciliteren

Creatief en innovatief onderzoekstalent kan het beste bottom up gefaciliteerd worden, en niet top down georganiseerd. Dat is te realiseren door een substantieel deel van de innovatiegelden te oormerken voor fundamenteel onderzoek in de topsectoren. Via open competitie moet dit budget worden geïnvesteerd in de beste mensen met de beste ideeën. Daarnaast moet de overheid bedrijven stimuleren om te investeren in R&D, daarbij nauwe samenwerking zoekend met universiteiten en kennisinstituten. Innovatie drijft op goede ideeën van talentvolle individuen in vruchtbare samenwerkingsverbanden. Laat dat talent niet verloren gaan. De Jonge Akademie staat klaar om mee te denken over verdere beleidsontwikkeling.

Namens De Jonge Akademie

Peter-Paul Verbeek
Appy Sluijs
Beatrice de Graaf

De auteurs zijn lid van De Jonge Akademie en hebben dit stuk geschreven namens De Jonge Akademie, een zelfstandig onderdeel van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. De Jonge Akademie is een dynamisch en innovatief platform van jonge topwetenschappers, werkzaam bij Nederlandse universiteiten en onderzoeksinstituten, die samen een breed spectrum van wetenschappelijke disciplines vertegenwoordigen en een visie uitdragen op wetenschap en wetenschapsbeleid.

Over Papoea Nieuw Guinea, kannibalisme en prion-ziektes zie:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Lees hier de review ‘Understanding Kuru’ The contribution of anthropology and medicine door Shirley Lindenbaum

0 comments.

Some first thoughts on Moroccan reforms and khitab

Posted on June 18th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Society & Politics in the Middle East.

Last night Moroccan king Mohammed VI announced reforms and a constitutional referendum.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
This can be seen as the answer of the Moroccan establishment to the protests in Morocco. Will it be sufficient for the protesters? The ideas of the king sounded healthy and promising but isn’t it more of the same…again? At the same time I’m also not that sure of the ‘revolutionairy spirit’ is so strong anymore. Furthermore it remains to be seen whether the supporters and opponents of reform will get an equal share of media publicity in the weeks leading up to the referendum. And if the referendum will be a clear yes for the reform, will the reforms eventually lead to a substantial decrease of the power of the current elite? Journalist Achmed Benchemsi has a good first take I think on the speech at Al Jazeera:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Read the full text of the king’s speech on Moroccans for Change.

2 comments.

Theologisch debat – Dialoog en geloof in actie

Posted on June 15th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: [Online] Publications, Important Publications, ISIM/RU Research, Multiculti Issues.

Het tijdschrift Theologisch Debat doet haar naam eer aan en heeft een debatsectie; ditmaal over interreligieuze dialoog. De opening wordt verzorgd door kersverse hoogleraar interreligieuze dialoog Marcel Poorthuis. Andere artikelen zijn van Gé Speelman (Een integere en respectvolle dialoog – Opmerkingen bij de Islamnota van de PKN), Bernhard Reitsma (Wat er achter de dialoog schuil gaat) en van uw blogger en antropoloog: Dialoog en Geloof in Actie.

Inleiding

In zijn artikel gaat Marcel Poorthuis in op het ‘eigene van de dialoog tussen godsdiensten’. Volgens Poorthuis zijn mensen weliswaar door de secularisatie ‘vervreemd van hun eigen religie en kerk’, maar dat betekent niet dat er geen belangstelling is voor religie. Die belangstelling kenmerkt zich echter door een hoog knip- en plakgehalte waarbij mensen hun eigen religieuze repertoire van voorstellingen en praktijken in elkaar zetten zonder oog voor de tradities en zonder enig gevoel voor de sociale verbanden van het jodendom, christendom en islam. Deze postmoderne houding zoals hij dit noemt bedreigt de interreligieuze dialoog. Gé Speelman heeft in dit nummer hier al uitstekend commentaar opgeleverd. Ik ga in mijn bijdrage in op de andere hindernis voor religieuze dialoog die Poorthuis ziet: fundamentalisme. Volgens hem is fundamentalisme het tegendeel van dialoog om dat ‘de ander daarin louter als ketter en vijand verschijnt, zonder enige verwantschap’.

Wat ik wil betogen is dat Poorthuis er een heel specifiek religiebegrip op na houdt dat heel gesloten is doordat het uitgaat van de vraag tot welke religie mensen zich rekenen en welke bijbehorende geloofsvoorstellingen mensen hebben. De vragen hoe mensen geloven en waarin mensen geloven komt niet aan de orde. Daardoor mist hij dat de waarde van interreligieuze dialoog (in het algemeen) niet ligt in uitwisselingen over religieuze doctrines, religieuze overtuigingen en geschiedenis, maar, zo betoog ik hier, in sociale relaties. En daar zouden zelfs fundamentalisten een rol in kunnen spelen. Allereerst zal ik verder ingaan op het specifieke religiebegrip van Poorthuis. Om dit verder te concretiseren geef ik vervolgens een korte schets geven van de activiteiten onder moslims met betrekking tot interreligieuze dialoog waarna ik aan de hand van voorbeelden in Gouda en Roermond me richt op de vraag wat interreligieuze dialoog te maken heeft met hoe mensen geloven en meer specifiek met hoe fundamentalisten ( salafisten’) geloven.

Theologisch Debat wordt uitgegeven door Uitgeverij Kok en zit tegenwoordig ook op twitter: Theologisch Debat.
De bijdrage van Poorthuis is gebaseerd op zijn oratie die u HIER kunt lezen. Op Republiek Allochtonië een verkorte weergave van die oratie: Dialoog tussen de religies: toekomst of verleden tijd?

1 comment.

Closing the week 23 – Middle East Trials and Tribulations

Posted on June 12th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: anthropology, Society & Politics in the Middle East.

Most popular on Closer this week:

  1. Buitengewoon gevangen in de ‘war against terror’ – De casus Saddek Sbaa
  2. “V for Vendetta”: The Other Face of Egypt’s Youth Movement – by Linda Herrera
  3. Making sense of the emotional field
  4. Discriminatie, activisme en het alledaagse

Previous updates:

Tunisia Uprising I – Tunisia Uprising II – Tunisia / Egypt Uprising Essential Reading I – The Egypt Revolution – A Need to Read List – Women & Middle East Uprisings – The Syrian Uprising – Women2Drive. See also the section Society and Politics in the Middle East (Dutch and English guest contributions).

  • If you want to stay updated and did not subscribe yet, you can do so HERE

YouTube – Middle East – Trials and Tribulations

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Syria
‘A Gay Girl in Damascus’ called into question — real or not? – BlogPost – The Washington Post

Addressing the doubts Wednesday, Carvin wrote on Twitter: “Again, people should operate under the assumption that there is a real blogger under detention in Syria. Who they are is another matter.”

After Report of Disappearance, Questions About Syrian-American Blogger – NYTimes.com

Although it remains possible that the blog’s author was indeed detained, and has been writing a factual, not fictional, account of recent events in Syria, readers should be aware that the one person who has identified herself — to The Times, the BBC and Al Jazeera — as a personal friend of the blogger, Sandra Bagaria, has now clarified that she has never actually met the author of the Gay Girl in Damascus blog. Ms. Bagaria told The Lede that she had also never conversed with Ms. Arraf face to face via Skype, but had conducted an online relationship with her since January entirely through Internet communications in writing, including more than 500 e-mails.

A Gay Girl in Damascus: Apology to readers

I never expected this level of attention. While the narrative vo?ce may have been fictional, the facts on th?s blog are true and not m?sleading as to the situation on the ground. I do not believe that I have harmed anyone — I feel that I have created an important voice for issues that I feel strongly about.

I only hope that people pay as much attention to the people of the Middle East and their struggles in th?s year of revolutions. The events there are be?ng shaped by the people living them on a daily basis. I have only tried to illuminate them for a western audience.

This experience has sadly only confirmed my feelings regarding the often superficial coverage of the Middle East and the pervasiveness of new forms of liberal Orientalism.

However, I have been deeply touched by the reactions of readers.

Best,
Tom MacMaster,
Istanbul, Turkey
July 12, 2011

The sole author of all posts on this blog

The Two Homs—By Esther Adorno (Harper’s Magazine)

I ask Qassem who the Shabbiha (“shadow”) are. “Shabbiha is how we used to call the gangs making money during the Syrian occupation in Lebanon,” Qassem says, lighting a cigarette. “They used to travel in ghost cars without plates; that’s how they got the name Shabbiha. They would smuggle cars from Lebanon to Syria. The police turned a blind eye, and in return Shabbiha would act as a shadow militia in case of need. . . . Now that soldiers are being killed for refusing to shoot civilians, or for refusing to shoot those running across the Lebanese border as refugees, Shabbiha is definitely more reliable than the army.” But as more people are stuffed in jail, and more protests are organized by relatives who want these prisoners released and returned home, more men are needed to suppress the opposition—and that’s why recruiters here come knocking at the door of young men like Qassem. He won’t even tell me what sect he belongs to.

The Syrian uprising: The balance of power is shifting | The Economist

A MONTH ago seasoned watchers of Syria reckoned that the regime’s ferocious crackdown would keep the lid on dissent, albeit with President Bashar Assad’s legitimacy badly impaired. Now the prevailing wisdom is changing. Rather than subside, the protests are spreading and intensifying. Having started in the south and spread to coastal cities such as Banias, they moved to Homs, Syria’s third-biggest city, and the surrounding central districts. More recently they have gripped Hama, the country’s fourth city, famed for its uprising in 1982, when 20,000 people may have been killed by the then president, Hafez Assad, the present incumbent’s father. After starting in the rural areas, the unrest has hit cities all over the country. And the death toll, well past 1,200, has begun to rise more sharply. On June 3rd, at least 70 people are reported to have been killed in Hama alone.

Syria Comment » Archives » Idlib and Aleppo

Idlib province, which is only 45 minutes from Aleppo is the eye of the hurricane. The government is poring troops into the region to make sure it remains under firm control. Syria cannot afford to lose territory where an insurgency or rebel army might emerge. Damascus will do everything it can to preclude the formation of a Benghazi, which would allow foreign intelligence agencies and governments to begin arming and training a rebel army, as happened in Libya.

Egyptian Chronicles: The association of Syria street

The logo of the association
at one of the shops there “Facebook”
Syria street is known to be a busy vital street in Mohendessin area. It is not only busy but also crowded thanks to its shops making it a hell for parking at the evening. Lately people have noticed something in the street then new shops , they noticed a sign with the name “The Youth of Syria street association”. Now who are those youth and what is this association !?

Syria intensifies assault on anti-Assad protesters | Reuters

(Reuters) – Syrian security forces intensified their assault on protesters calling for President Bashar al-Assad to quit, killing at least 34 demonstrators in the latest crackdown in the city of Hama, activists said.

Syria: Crimes Against Humanity in Daraa | Human Rights Watch

(New York) – Systematic killings and torture by Syrian security forces in the city of Daraa since protests began there on March 18, 2011, strongly suggest that these qualify as crimes against humanity, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

Egypt
The Rubicon is in Egypt: an interview with Azza Karam « The Immanent Frame

Azza Karam is the Senior Culture Advisor at the United Nations Population Fund, where she has pioneered efforts to make human development work more attentive to religion. Karam was born in Egypt and grew up, as the daughter of an Egyptian diplomat, in countries around the world, eventually earning a doctorate in international relations from the University of Amsterdam. Her several books include Transnational Political Islam (2004) and Islamisms, Women and the State (1998). Prior to joining UNFPA, she worked for the World Conference of Religions for Peace, the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, and the United Nations Development Program, among other organizations.

This interview was conducted in conjunction with the SSRC project on Religion and International Affairs. Karam here speaks only for herself, not for any institution, organization, or board.—ed.

NS: Before we get to your work at the United Nations, let’s start with recent events in Egypt, your home country. How, in your view, is the Egyptian revolution of a few months ago proceeding? Has it been betrayed yet?

In Egypt, Islamist Salafist movement vies for political power in wake of revolution – The Washington Post

For years, the rugged Mediterranean shoreline here has been a favorite necking place for young Egyptian couples. But now menacing new messages have been spray-painted on the rocks.

“Would you find it all right for your sister?” one message says, addressing the men who bring girlfriends to the rocky area where waves break. “God sees you.” Other messages decry alcohol. One says simply, “Enough sins.”

The fresh scrawls are the work of Islamists who are emerging from the fringes of Egyptian society with zeal and swagger. Their graffiti and billboards calling for a more conservative Egypt have become pervasive here in recent months, part of a rapidly growing debate about what should emerge from a revolution that toppled an autocratic leader and unleashed long-subdued social and political forces.

Egyptian religious minorities fear rise of Islamists | Al-Masry Al-Youm: Today’s News from Egypt

Amid sectarian clashes and uncertainty about their future, religious minority leaders are expressing concern about the possibility of certain Islamic groups rising to power and writing a new constitution that does not protect minority rights.

Yemen
Was there a Yemeni Revolution? | Informed Comment

Aljazeera Arabic is reporting that later in the day Sunday, clashes between armed groups of pro-Saleh and anti-Saleh gunmen broke out in the capital, where the situation is “unstable,” after Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh flew to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment late Saturday.

On the National Democratic Party – Blog – The Arabist

In mid-January, I found myself at a seminar in Rome presenting a paper on Egypt’s National Democratic Party. Others spoke about the economic situation, the Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian foreign policy. We all shared a gloomy view of situation in Egypt at the twilight of the Mubarak era and predicted trouble in the year ahead as Gamal Mubarak would make his bid to succeed his father. A couple of days later, I went to Tunisia to cover the revolution there, and then cut that trip short to make it back to Cairo by January 28, the day protestors defeated the police and security services across the country.

My paper on the NDP saw the party as the battleground of elite politics over the last decade, a place where different elements of the regime fought out their parcel of privilege and influence.

Bahrain
What next for Bahrain? by Kristian Coates Ulrichsen | The Middle East Channel

The lifting of the emergency law in Bahrain on June 1 seemed to pay immediate dividends two days later when the FIA reinstated the Bahrain Grand Prix in October. This decision signified a degree of international approval for the government’s efforts to contain the instability that broke out in February. Yet “normality” rests on a repressive maintenance of public order and a sustained closure of political and oppositional space, and is underpinned by foreign security personnel and Peninsula Shield Forces. These insulate the ruling Al-Khalifa family from opposition pressures and reduce the likelihood of any significant reform process in the Kingdom. In light of recent developments, what does the future hold for Bahrain, and for Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) involvement?

Saudi Arabia
Could Women’s Rights Finally Improve in Saudi Arabia? – Max Fisher – International – The Atlantic

Six months in, it’s still unclear whether the still-ongoing demonstrations and battles of the Arab Spring will produce a net positive or negative change for the region. They have yielded revolution in Tunisia, potential revolution in Egypt, civil war in Libya, potential civil war in Yemen, and violent crackdowns in Bahrain and Syria. Thousands of civilians have died, and though some regimes have changed for the better, some have only entrenched their worst behavior. It may be months of years before the uprisings recede and we can understand their impact. But there is one area where the Spring could finally produce one of the region’s most-needed, most-overdue reforms: women’s rights in Saudi Arabia.

A Conversation With Saudi Women’s Rights Campaigner Wajeha al-Huwaider | The Nation

Wajeha al-Huwaider is perhaps the best-known Saudi campaigner for women’s rights, human rights and democracy. She has protested energetically against the kingdom’s lack of formal laws (the Koran is it) and basic freedoms and in particular against the guardianship system, under which every female, from birth to death, needs the permission of a male relative to make decisions in all important areas of life—education, travel, marriage, employment, finances, even surgery. In 2008 a video of her driving a car, which is forbidden for women in Saudi Arabia, created a sensation when it was posted on YouTube. Al-Huwaider is a strong supporter of the June 17 Movement, which calls on Saudi women to start driving on that date, and made the celebrated YouTube video of its co-founder, Manal al-Sherif, jailed for nine days in May for driving. While this interview was in preparation, she was briefly detained by the police when she tried to visit Nathalie Morin, a French-Canadian woman held captive with her children by her Saudi husband.

Libya
NATO drops bombs on Gaddafi tweets | Herald Sun

NATO has scrambled warplanes against Muammar Gaddafi’s forces after Libyans tweeted troop movements on the micro-blogging website, alliance officials say.

Popular Protest in North Africa and the Middle East (V): Making Sense of Libya – International Crisis Group

The present conflict clearly represents the death agony of the Jamahiriya. Whether what comes after it fulfils Libyans’ hopes for freedom and legitimate government very much depends on how and when Qaddafi goes. This in turn depends on how – and how soon – the armed conflict gives way to political negotiation allowing Libya’s political actors, including Libyan public opinion as a whole, to address the crucial questions involved in defining the constitutive principles of a post-Jamahiriya state and agreeing on the modalities and interim institutions of the transition phase. The international community’s responsibility for the course events will take is very great. Instead of stubbornly maintaining the present policy and running the risk that its consequence will be dangerous chaos, it should act now to facilitate a negotiated end to the civil war and a new beginning for Libya’s political life.

Morocco
A few links on Morocco – Blog – The Arabist

The February 20 movement continues to challenge the monarchy in Morocco, on the eve of the unveiling of a royal commission’s proposal for constitutional reform. Adl wal Ihsan, the country’s largest Islamist movement and a key supporter of the reform movement, has called for a civil state (rather than a religious one) as the regime launches a campaign to tar February 20 has having been taken over by Islamist and leftist radicals. Rachid Nini, Morocco’s most influential journalist, is sentenced to a year in prison, while the police begins to crack down on protestors, killing one last week. This and more in the links below, and analysis of Morocco will come at some later point. Do check out of the first link, which is an interactive website to debate, article by article, the constitution — it’s a great model to follow and someone in Egypt should do the same.

The Middle East Uprising general
Why social scientists failed to “predict” the Egyptian Revolution

We’ve heard it many times: The Egyptian revolution was unexpected. Especially in Western countries, it is often called “Facebook Revolution”. That is not only wrong but insulting as it renders invisible the previous demonstrations, strikes and other political activities, going back 10 years or even longer, said prominent blogger and activist Hossam El-Hamalawy who blogs at 3arabawy.

This political activism has gone unnoticed by many researchers and political analysts, especially in the West. Why?

Rising Literacy and a Shrinking Birth Rate: A Look at the Root Causes of the Arab Revolution – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International

In a SPIEGEL interview, French social scientist Emmanuel Todd discusses the demographic roots of the Arab revolution, which he argues was spurred by rising literacy and rapidly shrinking birth rates. He also muses on the ghost of Osama bin Laden, arguing “al-Qaida was already dead,” and on why he believes Germany is not a part of the “core West.”

Three Powerfully Wrong–and Wrongly Powerful–American Narratives about the Arab Spring

The “Arab Spring” that actually began in the dead of winter has spread from Tunisia to Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, and Syria…and the year only half over. As the media, policymakers, and global audiences struggle to make sense of changes that have inspired hundreds of millions to “just say no” to decades of dictatorship, a number of narratives have taken hold in the US—evident in remarks on cable news talk shows, at academic and policy symposia, and on Twitter—about precisely what is happening and what these massive crowds want. While elements of these narratives have some foundation in truth, they also present such a simplified view as to obscure crucial dimensions of the power struggles across the region. Below we unpack three of the most common narratives whose “truth” has become almost conventional wisdom, tossed out at cocktail parties and across coffee shops and metros. We aim to highlight what kinds of politics are made possible (and what kinds of challenges to power are foreclosed) as these narratives become part of the “common sense” that shapes our understanding of these extraordinary events.

Middle East misc.

THE VIEW FROM FEZ: Don’t miss the Aissawa Sufis tonight @Fes Festival

A number of teams of Aissawi musicians work in each city in Morocco, but the sound especially permeates Fez and Meknes. Each group is led by a muqaddam, literally a presenter or leader. Abdullah is one such muqaddam, one that is known throughout the country. His father and grandfather were both Aissawa muqaddams, it runs in his family. He lamented that he has no son to continue the family business and, although he has two daughters who are well steeped in the style, he is concerned about the future. He and another prominent figure from Fez’s Sufi community, Abd ar-Rahim Amrani, will be joined onstage by maqaddams from Rabat, Fez, and Meknes, giving tonight’s performance an all-star cast. Amrani, an orchestrater of this week’s events, will bring elements of his own Hamadcha Brotherhood to the stage, insha’allah (God willing). These two are revered outside of Morocco as well – they just returned from a short stay in California where they performed and gave workshops to students at UCLA.

Al-Qaida Video: Zawahiri Vows to Continue Bin Laden’s Work – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International

First he praised Osama bin Laden, and then he issued threats to Pakistan and the United States. One month after the al-Qaida leader was shot dead in Abbottabad, his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri has promised that the group will stay the course. But he remained silent about the group’s new leadership.

Iran, FIFA Clash Over Hijab – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty © 2011

Iran is challenging FIFA’s decision to ban its women footballers from playing an Olympic qualifier match because of their Islamic dress.

Reformist Islam – Qantara.de

Philosopher Jawdat Said, little known in the West, has been propagating a vision of Islam free of violence for the past 40 years. His books have been widely read and discussed by Islamic activists in the Arab world. A profile by Bashar Humeid


Beyond denial « The Immanent Frame

For a brief moment in 2007, news of a hit Iranian television series, whose Farsi title was translated variously as Zero Degree Turn or Zero Point Orbit, proliferated across the print and digital mediascapes of the Anglophone world. The series, created by Iranian director Hassan Fathi at great expense and broadcast in a thirty-episode season on the flagship state television station IRIB1, revolves around a Romeo and Juliet plot of illicit romance, with a distinctive twist: while the proverbial Romeo is one Habib Parsa (played by Iranian hearthrob Shahab Hosseini), a Muslim Iranian pursuing his studies in France, his Juliet is none other than a Jewish classmate, Sarah Astrok (played by the French actress Nathalie Matti), with whom he falls in love.

Misc.
Think You Can Handle Over 150 Facebook Friends? Not!

Got ego? Trying to garner Facebook friends infinitum? Well you can’t!

According to Robin Dunbar, professor of evolutionary anthropology at Oxford University, the Facebook yardstick that your brain can only handle is 150 friends.

Research Focuses on Muslim Women Under Khmer Rouge | News | Khmer-English

Cambodia’s women Muslims are increasingly embracing their own identities, as the minority group as a whole struggles with the impacts of the Khmer Rouge, according to new research.

Express highlights its own inaccuracies on Muslim burkha ban challenge | Full Fact

The Express had two of its perennial bugbears – immigration and Europe – in its sights this morning when it reported that a Muslim couple that had settled in Britain were to use taxpayers’ cash to fight France’s burkha ban in the European Court of Human Rights.

It’s headline boldly declared that: “French Muslims to use our cash to fight burkha ban.”

San Francisco’s proposed circumcision ban galvanizes religious opposition – CNN Belief Blog – CNN.com Blogs

The nation’s largest evangelical Christian umbrella group has come out against San Francisco’s proposed circumcision ban, evidence that the voter initiative is beginning to galvanize national religious opposition.

Counter-terrorism and multiculturalism: Better than cure—but difficult | The Economist

Good riddance, say critics who think that officialdom, in its efforts to combat terrorism, has gone too far in co-operating with Muslim figures who are themselves far from liberal democrats. They argue that Mr Baker’s ideological roots as a Salafi—one who takes very literally the precepts of Muhammad and his companions—makes him an unsuitable recipient of state funds. Mr Baker was also chairman from 1994 to 2009 of the Brixton mosque, where Richard Reid, later known as the “shoe bomber”, rolled out his prayer rug for a while. (Mr Baker says he warned the police repeatedly about militant recruiting there.) The critics felt vindicated when STREET’s website recently carried advice on clothing and music from clerics who in other contexts excoriate gays and Jews.

Britain’s wrestling match with ‘extremists’ is self-defeating – The National

All over Europe, amid increasingly harsh political debate, governments are having to address the issue of how to integrate Muslims communities. In some cases the response has been populist: Belgium is expected next month to follow the lead of France in banning the veiling of women’s faces in public.

In countries as diverse as Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Austria and Italy, political parties are on the rise that focus the generalised discontent of voters on to Muslim communities. Views which only a few years ago would have been dismissed as fascist are now part of mainstream debate.

Muslims call for action against hate crimes – Crime, UK – The Independent

Britain’s largest mainstream Muslim organisation will today call for “robust action” to combat Islamophobic attacks amid fears of growing violence and under-reporting of hate crimes.

Bulgaria Election | Nationalists | Religion Violence | Muslims

Every Friday at noon, Muslims gather at the only mosque in Bulgaria’s capital, waiting for the daily prayer to start. Since their gathering turned bloody three weeks ago, police officers and television cameras have joined them.

Muslim women’s group launches ‘jihad against violence’ | UK news | The Guardian

A British Muslim women’s group has launched a “jihad against violence”, in a bid to reclaim the term jihad from extremists.

Algeria’s Impact on French Philosophy: Between Poststructuralist Theory and Colonial Practice

In the past few years, there appears to have been a falling out between Middle Eastern studies and post-structuralist theory. Edward Said’s Orientalism remains necessary reading for most graduate students, but the surrounding debates in post-colonial and post-structuralist theory have fallen decisively out of fashion. It would seem that the so-called “cultural turn” (often – mistakenly – taken to be synonymous with post-structuralism or postmodernism) was actually a dead-end. While there is a robust debate in critical theory as to the political implications of post-structuralism, in Middle Eastern studies the current refrain sometimes begins with: “just say No to Discourse.”

A more sustained engagement with both critical theory, on the one hand, and Middle Eastern history, on the other, might offer a productive way out of this impasse.

New Statesman – We will continue to spy on Muslims, says Theresa May

“I don’t see anything wrong with identifying people who are vulnerable to being taken down a certain route.”

tabsir.net » Cruising above the Empty Quarter

There is a spectacular photographic website devoted to a book by George Steinmetz, who took photographs across the fabled Empty Quarter of Arabia.

Dutch
Kabinet zet zich niet meer in voor etnische minderheden – Nieuws – VK

Het kabinet-Rutte zet zich niet in voor de emancipatie van etnische minderheden. Dat is een breuk met het verleden: het vorige kabinet plaatste de emancipatie van minderheden nog hoog op de agenda.

Secularisme, scheiding van kerk en staat en islam

In Nederland en veel andere Europese landen wordt steeds vaker een beroep gedaan op een strikte scheiding van kerk en staat in beleidsvorming ten aanzien van de Islam. Regelmatig worden ook de geschiedenis van het secularisme en de Verlichting aangeroepen als antwoord op de crisis van het multiculturalisme. Dit sterker wordende secularistische discours is herkenbaar uit de Franse context waarin het al jaren gangbaar is. In het Frankrijk van na 1989 was de laïcité lange tijd een gematigd en liberaal antwoord op de racistische strategieën van Le Pen. Ook in andere Europese landen lijkt secularisme het fatsoenlijke alternatief voor populistische anti-Islam discoursen. Voor linkse politiek lijkt het een goede, zelfs veelbelovende optie voor de omgang met de Islam, want hoewel secularisme niet per se de zichtbaarheid van de Islam in Europa bevordert, gaat het hier niet, zo is de gedachte, om de uitsluiting van de Islam, of eventueel zelfs om racisme ten aanzien van moslims. Secularisme wordt juist opgevat als de neutraliteit van de staat ten aanzien van alle religies. Religies dienen vrijgelaten te worden door de staat, mits ze de gewetensvrijheid van anderen maar respecteren en hun waarden en praktijken niet indruisen tegen de grondrechten van ieder individu in de liberale rechtsstaat. Het grote verschil met het multiculturalisme is dan, in de ogen van de secularisten, dat een seculiere orde het paternalistische optreden van de overheid, waarbij conservatieve religieuze elites vaak als vertegenwoordigers van hele groepen of zelfs ‘culturen’ werden gezien, overboord zet.

Eindhovense moskee zet zich in voor bloeddonatie

De komende twee weken zal Stichting Waqf van de Eindhovense moskee zich inzetten voor bloeddonatie en het belang hiervan benadrukken door de moslims bewust te maken van dit maatschappelijke onderwerp. Hiermee willen ze dat moslims zich maatschappelijk inzetten. Aldus de woordvoerders van de stichting: “Het tonen van betrokkenheid en het zich inzetten voor de maatschappij is een vereiste voor alle burgers.”

Sjaria op de Krim blijkt broodje aap – Sargasso

Moslimmeisje van 19 gestenigd na schoonheidswedstrijd’, kopte de krant. Drie jongemannen zouden een dorpsgenote met stenen om het leven hebben gebracht omdat haar deelname aan een regionale miss-verkiezing “niet in overeenstemming” zou zijn geweest “met de sjaria”. Andere persbureaus en media, waaronder ANP, Algemeen Dagblad, De Pers, Elsevier, Reformatorisch Dagblad, Nederlands Dagblad en tal van regionale dagbladen, volgden slaafs.

0 comments.

Haykel and Schmitz on Conflict in Yemen

Posted on June 6th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Society & Politics in the Middle East.

Bloggingheads.tv has an interesting talk between Bernard Haykel and Charles Schmitz on the current developments and its backgrounds in Yemen. If you ever wanted to have a crash course on Yemen politics, tribes, Al Qaeda and history, watch and listen.

Bernard Haykel is professor of Near Eastern Studies and director of The Institute for the Transregional Study of the Contemporary Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, at Princeton University. Read his ‘five books‘ interview at Browser.com earlier this year in which he elaborates on his choice of essential reading on Yemen.
Charles Schmitz is Associate Professor of Geography at Towson University, President of the American Institute for Yemeni Studies, and a scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington. Read also his recent article, Yemen’s Tribal Showdown, on Foreign Affairs.

0 comments.

Saudi Arabia – Reform, Revolution and Hypocrisy

Posted on June 5th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: anthropology, International Terrorism, Society & Politics in the Middle East.

Madawi Al-Rasheed is Professor of Social Anthropology at King’s College, London. Born in Saudi Arabia, she currently lives in London. Her research focuses on history, society, religion and politics in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Her recent publications include Politics in an Arabian Oasis, A History of Saudi Arabia, and Contesting the Saudi State. In an interview with The Real News she reflects on current developments in Saudi Arabia against the background of the Middle Eastern uprisings and ‘Western hypocrisy’

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

In the next video you find another interview with Madawi Al-Rasheed that gives you some more background information on who rules Saudi Arabia and the War against Terror.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

You can find Madawi Al Rasheed’s website HERE.

0 comments.

Buitengewoon gevangen in de war against terror – De casus Saddek Sbaa

Posted on June 4th, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: International Terrorism, Religious and Political Radicalization, Society & Politics in the Middle East, Young Muslims.

In juli 2009 wisten Nederlandse media te melden dat er in Kenia vier Nederlandse jongeren (één van Somalische en drie van Marokkaanse afkomst) waren opgepakt in Kenia. Zij zouden van plan geweest zijn om door te reizen naar Somalië om daar deel te nemen aan de gewelddadige jihad; volgens eigen zeggen waren ze slechts op vakantie. In oktober 2010 is de zaak tegen hen geseponeerd wegens gebrek aan bewijs.

Eén van de mannen die destijds is opgepakt is Saddek Sbaa (24) die sinds zijn vijfde in Nederland woont maar niet de Nederlandse nationaliteit heeft (in tegenstelling tot zijn familieleden). In 2010 is de verblijfsvergunning van Sbaa ingetrokken. Hij ging daar tegen in beroep en zat hangende dat beroep vast in Vught in (ondanks het sepot) de terroristenafdeling van de EBI in Vught. Vanwege het, volgens eigen zeggen, ‘ondraaglijke detentieregime’ en ‘getreiter door de AIVD’ vertrok hij in november 2010 uit eigen beweging naar Marokko. Niet verstandig zult u misschien zeggen en ook zijn advocaat waarschuwde hem voor de risico’s. De IND (die zijn verblijfsvergunning had ingetrokken op basis van de informatie van de AIVD) zou echter gesteld hebben dat Sbaa in Marokko geen gevaar liep. De rechter oordeelde daar overigens anders over. De advocaat maakte de afspraak met de AIVD dat Marokko niet geinformeerd zou worden over zijn komst maar bij aankomst bleken de autoriteiten wel degelijk op de hoogte te zijn en pakten ze hem op. Volgens de advocaat betekent dat dat de AIVD tóch, ondanks de afspraak, het dossier had overgedragen aan Marokko. (Zelf denk ik overigens dat dat niet noodzakelijkerwijze zo is, Marokko houdt Marokkaans-Europese terreurverdachten sowieso in de gaten). Ook een vriend van Sbaa zou in Marokko ondervraagd zijn over Sbaa. Sbaa verdween na opgepakt te zijn, maar na vier weken nam hij contact op met zijn familie om te laten weten dat alles goed was. Later echter werd duidelijk volgens vrienden (die het dagboek van Sbaa in handen hadden gekregen) dat hij gemarteld was. Sbaa is veroordeeld tot twee jaar cel op basis van de Kenia-zaak en de beschuldiging dat hij deel uitmaakte van een terreurcel in Nederland.

Sinds 15 februari 2011 demonstreerde Sbaa samen met medegevangenen in Sale (bij Rabat) dagelijks tegen de slechte detentieomstandigheden en voor eerlijke processen.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Statement I
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Statement II
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Protest in de gevangenis, gevangenen die het islamitische lied Ghuraba brengen. Let op, tussen seconde 10 en 14 ziet u een jongeman met puntige baard, gestreept gewaad met korte mouwen en zwarte tulband die aan het filmen is. Dat zou Saddek Sbaa zijn.
In de nacht van 18 op 19 mei bestormde de Marokkaanse politie de gevangenis. Daarbij vielen één dode en diverse gewonden. Zie HIER het verslag van Amnesty.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Een Italiaanse moslima doet verslag van de inval van de ordetroepen
Op zaterdag 21 mei hielden zijn vrienden een protestbijeenkomst voor de Marokkaanse ambassade in Den Haag en vroegen aandacht voor het lot van Sbaa en andere gevangen van wie ‘rechten worden vertrapt’.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Statement tegen martelingen in Marokko van Behind-Bars en Team Free Saddik
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Getuigenis van een Marokkaanse vrouw tijdens de persconferentie over de de inval in de gevangenis van Sale; naar aanleiding van de zaak tegen Younes Zarli

De demo in Den Haag staat niet op zichzelf. Op facebook is de groep Saddik Free actief, er is een website Behind-Bars en dus (diverse) Youtube kanalen. En er is een groep die zich richt op het schrijven van brieven naar gevangenen.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Al eerder kwam er een dergelijke oproep voor Filiz Gelowicz die in Duitsland gevangen zit nadat ze ze schuldig werd bevonden aan terrorisme gerelateerde feiten. Haar man, Fritz Gelowicz, was al eerder veroordeeld in de geruchtmakende zaak over de Sauerland-groep. Zie HIER een interview met hem.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Nu zijn de campagnes vrij ideologisch geladen. Maar niettemin laat de zaak van Sbaa (ondanks de nodige onduidelijkheden) toch wel weer enkele punten zien die ik al eerder heb aangeroerd hier, bijvoorbeeld in de zaak van de Curieuze verdwijning van Mohammed Chentouf en over rechtspositie van vermeende terreurverdachten (of dat officieel niet eens) in Terreur, macht en privacy en in de meest recente zaak waarbij 12 Somalïers werden gearresteerd op verdenking van terrorismeplannen. Een paar vragen:

  1. Hoe zit het met de rechtspositie van vermeende terreurverdachten?
  2. Hoe kan de IND voor eigen rechter spelen op basis van dezelfde informatie die voor het OM onvoldoende bewijs inhield voor een strafproces? (ik weet, het één is administratief en het ander strafrechtelijk)
  3. Hoe zit het met de rechtspositie van Marokkaanse Nederlanders in Marokko (ik weet Sbaa heeft geen Nederlandse nationaliteit en in het geval van Chentouf zeiden politici letterlijk ‘good riddance’)
  4. Wat is nu precies de rol van de AIVD?

Dat laatste komt vandaag aan bod bij het radioprogramma Argos van de VPRO:
Argos , Archive » 4 juni 2011: De AIVD-connecties in de Arabische wereld

De opstand in de Arabische wereld maakt eens te meer duidelijk hoe gehaat de regimes en het ondersteunende veiligheidsapparaat zijn. In Egypte werden zelfs de burelen van de veiligheidsdienst bestormd door betogers. Gerard Bouman, hoofd van onze eigen inlichtingendienst AIVD, was daar vorig jaar nog op de thee bij Omar Suleiman, het toenmalige hoofd van die dienst. Niet voor niets, want sinds eind jaren negentig werkt de AIVD in het kader van de terrorismebestrijding nauw samen met inlichtingendiensten in de Arabische wereld. Ook diensten die het niet zo nauw nemen met de mensenrechten.

Marokko is de laatste jaren speerpunt in die samenwerking, terwijl de manier waarop dat land omgaat met gevangenen door internationale mensenrechtenorganisaties betiteld wordt als martelingen. Een Nederlands-Marokkaanse man, wiens terrorismezaak in Nederland bij gebrek aan bewijs werd geseponeerd, zit nu voor dezelfde feiten in Marokko in de gevangenis. Argos over terrorismebestrijding over de grens.

Argos zaterdag 4 juni, radio 1, 12.15 – 13.00 uur

Behind-Bars en Team Free Saddek hebben de volgende promo gemaakt met daarin een fragment van de getuigenis van Bochta Charef over de martelingen en vernederingen in At Tamaraah (de gehele getuigenis staat in drie delen op hun youtube kanaal):
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

PS.
Overigens hoort u in de filmpjes voortdurend dezelfde nasheed, islamitische a-cappella muziek. Het betreft hier Ghuraba, de vreemdelingen.

2 comments.

"V for Vendetta": The Other Face of Egypt's Youth Movement

Posted on June 3rd, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Guest authors, Headline, Society & Politics in the Middle East, Youth culture (as a practice).

Guest Author: Linda Herrera

“Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea […] and ideas are bulletproof.” – From the film V for Vendetta

Image from Google ImagesIn the summer of 2010 the youth of Facebook, “shebab al-Facebook,” began a campaign of peaceful civil disobedience through the Arabic “We are all Khaled Said” Facebook Fan Page. The success of their “silent stands” throughout the country gave youth a media friendly face as a group that espouses peaceful non-violent forms of civil disobedience to confront oppression and tyranny. The inspiration for the peaceful side of the movement was derived from divergent sources. Analysts writing in the western press were keen to point out the influence from celebrated figures and icons of nonviolence like Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Gene Sharp and the human rights orientation of the cause. [1] The reputation the youth garnered as deft in nonviolent civil disobedience was well deserved and the silent stands were a feat of group solidarity, DIY youth activism, and the art of on-line to off-line mobilization. [2] But in actuality the youth movement has moved on multiple fronts and employed diverse strategies. The page itself vacillates between using bellicose language and images when talking about the objects of their rage — for example, the police and Interior Ministry — to instructing the community on non-violent peaceful strategies. The two approaches coexist in a symbiotic relation. On the flip side of any mask of peace is often a mask of menace.

From Google Images

The Guy Fawkes mask lifted from the comic book series and film V for Vendetta has been a staple of the page and the movement from the start. V for Vendetta enjoys cult status among certain segments of shebab al-Facebook who fall under the rubric of leftists, anarchists, Mohamed el Baradei supporters, Islamists, post-Islamists — which are by no means mutually exclusive categories. The potent imagery and eminently quotable lines from the film permeate individual Facebook pages and the “We are all Khaled Said” Facebook Fan Page as posts, threads, cartoons, video links, and wall photos.

Cartoon posted on Arabic "We are All Khaled Said" Wall on July 29, 2010. The text reads: "We seek God's aid against misery."

The film, written and directed by Andy and Larry Wachowski and adapted from the comic book characters created by Alan Moore and David Lloyd, is set in a dystopian future that is a totalitarian Britain. The story serves as a warning to governments not to push their people too far and is a reminder to people of the formidable power they possess if they know how to harness it. The antihero, V, whose name stands for vendetta, vengeance, victim, villain, victory, violence, and “vestige of the vox populi,” also denotes “veritas,” truth. V survives a personal ordeal of captivity and torture and dedicates his life to taking revenge on his captors and awakening his fellow citizens to their oppression. He uses the mass broadcast system, the state’s propaganda machinery, to transmit his message. He proclaims:

“[T]he truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice . . . intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance, coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told . . . if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.”

The speech continues:

“I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be? War. Terror. Disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you and in your panic, you turned to the now High Chancellor Adam Sutler. He promised you order. He promised you peace. And all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, I sought to end that silence. Last night, I destroyed the Old Bailey to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago, a great citizen [Guy Fawkes] wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice and freedom are more than words — they are perspectives.”

V not only speaks the truth about the complicity of individuals in perpetuating the system, but makes them aware that they hold the power to overturn it. He declares to his fellow citizens:

“You are but a single individual. How can you possible make any difference? Individuals have no power in this modern world. That is what you’ve been taught because that is what they need you to believe. But it is not true. This is why they are afraid and the reason that I am here: to remind you that it is individuals who always hold the power. The real power. Individuals like me. And individuals like you.”

On June 14, 2010, eight days after Khaled Said’s killing at the hands of two officers, a short film, “Khaled for Vendetta,” was uploaded to YouTube with links to it on the Facebook page. A second film, “Khaled Vendetta,” followed on July 29, 2010.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
The five-minute film “Khaled for Vendetta,” written and directed by Mohamed Elm elhoda (Matrix2008 studio), masterfully draws out the parallels between the totalitarian society in V for Vendetta and Egypt under Emergency Law.

The film opens with ominous music from V for Vendetta followed by a fade in and out of Khaled’s image over a black backdrop. The shot cuts to the Peoples Assembly (Majlis al-Sha`ab) session of May 11, 2010, with the then Prime Minister, Ahmed Nazif, announcing the renewal of Emergency Law for two more years. He declares it will be used only to confront drugs and terrorism. Members of parliament applaud. The words “drugs and terrorism” are repeated over and over.

V sets down the first domino.

The next scene opens with a homemade film of a smiling Khaled in what appears to be his bedroom, followed by the now infamous photo taken at the morgue of his mangled face. A text states that Khaled Said was beaten by two plainclothes police under the auspices of the Emergency Law.

The masked man stacks more dominos.

The shot moves to a scene from the original film, a conversation between two police investigators about how everything is connected:

Finch: I suddenly had this feeling that everything was connected. It was like I could see the whole thing; one long chain of events that stretched back […]. I felt like I could see everything that had happened, and everything that was going to happen. It was like a perfect pattern laid out in front of me and I realized that we were all part of it, and all trapped by it.

Dominic: So do you know what’s gonna happen?

Finch: No. It was a feeling. But I can guess. With so much chaos, someone will do something stupid. And when they do, things will turn nasty. And then, Sutler [the leader] will be forced do the only thing he knows how to do. At which point, all V needs to do is keep his word. And then . . .

In the meantime V is setting up an elaborate pattern of dominos in the shape of an encircled “V.” He flicks the first domino and it sets off scenes of violence, chaos, destruction, fire, protests, shouting, upheaval.

The film ends with two still images. The first is of police in disproportionate numbers surrounding a small group of demonstrators. The second and final image is of the people outnumbering and surrounding the police. This closing image no doubt conveys the famous dictum from the film, “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”

In June of 2010, after the film was uploaded, a handful of viewers posted comments which are revealing of the movement within a movement.

“Brilliant video . . . Maybe Dr.El Baradei will be our “v” here in Egypt to save? us . . . I recommend this movie for everyone, it is like a mirror to the current situation here in Egypt . . . God bless you”

“Beneath this mask there is more? than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Adly, and ideas are bulletproof.”

“It brought the tears to my eyes? I can see it all coming soon isa? [inshaallah] it’s not khaled for vendetta anymore . . . it’s? Egypt for vendetta thnx mohamed for that awesome video”

With the fall of Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali on January 14, 2011, an image that immediately started circulating on Facebook was that of a masked man in the foreground of Tunisia’s flag. As Egyptians prepared for their own revolution, the simple image of the masked V made the rounds.

Image posted on Facebook

The appearance of this mask signaled that shebab al-Facebook were becoming restless. Their strategy of silence, even a deafening silence, was perceived as no longer enough to achieve the kind of political change they anxiously desired. And change they got.

In this post-revolution, post-Mubarak period, the mask and spirit of V have been more of less dormant. If events take a turn for the worse, if the crackdown from the military becomes unbearable or a dreaded counterrevolution occurs, V may very well resurface. But for now this seems unlikely, as youth are working in coalitions to develop civil political strategies to meet the changing circumstances. They are making some inroads as they press for democratic change, for working towards the realization of a society that affords people dignity and livelihoods. Yet so much remains unclear. What is certain is that the idea for change has been firmly planted and cannot be eradicated. Ideas after all, as V proclaims, are bulletproof. The struggle continues.

[1] See, for instance, articles about the influence of Gene Sharp in the revolution and articles about the Arabic translation of a comic book about Martin Luther King and strategies of non violence.

[2] For more on the silent stands see the excellent articles by Nadine Wahab and Adel Iskandar.

Linda Herrera is a social anthropologist with expertise in comparative and international education. She has lived in Egypt and conducted research on youth cultures and educational change in Egypt and the wider Middle East for over two decades. She is currently Associate Professor, Department of Education Policy, Organization and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is co-editor with A. Bayat of the volume Being Young and Muslim: New Cultural Politics in the Global North and South, published by Oxford University Press (2010).

This is article also appears on Jadaliyya.com. Other articles by Linda Herrera on Closer are:
Two Faces of Revolution
Egypt’s Revolution 2.0 – The Facebook Factor

1 comment.

“V for Vendetta”: The Other Face of Egypt’s Youth Movement

Posted on June 3rd, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Guest authors, Headline, Society & Politics in the Middle East, Youth culture (as a practice).

Guest Author: Linda Herrera

“Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea […] and ideas are bulletproof.” – From the film V for Vendetta

Image from Google ImagesIn the summer of 2010 the youth of Facebook, “shebab al-Facebook,” began a campaign of peaceful civil disobedience through the Arabic “We are all Khaled Said” Facebook Fan Page. The success of their “silent stands” throughout the country gave youth a media friendly face as a group that espouses peaceful non-violent forms of civil disobedience to confront oppression and tyranny. The inspiration for the peaceful side of the movement was derived from divergent sources. Analysts writing in the western press were keen to point out the influence from celebrated figures and icons of nonviolence like Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Gene Sharp and the human rights orientation of the cause. [1] The reputation the youth garnered as deft in nonviolent civil disobedience was well deserved and the silent stands were a feat of group solidarity, DIY youth activism, and the art of on-line to off-line mobilization. [2] But in actuality the youth movement has moved on multiple fronts and employed diverse strategies. The page itself vacillates between using bellicose language and images when talking about the objects of their rage — for example, the police and Interior Ministry — to instructing the community on non-violent peaceful strategies. The two approaches coexist in a symbiotic relation. On the flip side of any mask of peace is often a mask of menace.

From Google Images

The Guy Fawkes mask lifted from the comic book series and film V for Vendetta has been a staple of the page and the movement from the start. V for Vendetta enjoys cult status among certain segments of shebab al-Facebook who fall under the rubric of leftists, anarchists, Mohamed el Baradei supporters, Islamists, post-Islamists — which are by no means mutually exclusive categories. The potent imagery and eminently quotable lines from the film permeate individual Facebook pages and the “We are all Khaled Said” Facebook Fan Page as posts, threads, cartoons, video links, and wall photos.

Cartoon posted on Arabic "We are All Khaled Said" Wall on July 29, 2010. The text reads: "We seek God's aid against misery."

The film, written and directed by Andy and Larry Wachowski and adapted from the comic book characters created by Alan Moore and David Lloyd, is set in a dystopian future that is a totalitarian Britain. The story serves as a warning to governments not to push their people too far and is a reminder to people of the formidable power they possess if they know how to harness it. The antihero, V, whose name stands for vendetta, vengeance, victim, villain, victory, violence, and “vestige of the vox populi,” also denotes “veritas,” truth. V survives a personal ordeal of captivity and torture and dedicates his life to taking revenge on his captors and awakening his fellow citizens to their oppression. He uses the mass broadcast system, the state’s propaganda machinery, to transmit his message. He proclaims:

“[T]he truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice . . . intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance, coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told . . . if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.”

The speech continues:

“I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be? War. Terror. Disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you and in your panic, you turned to the now High Chancellor Adam Sutler. He promised you order. He promised you peace. And all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, I sought to end that silence. Last night, I destroyed the Old Bailey to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago, a great citizen [Guy Fawkes] wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice and freedom are more than words — they are perspectives.”

V not only speaks the truth about the complicity of individuals in perpetuating the system, but makes them aware that they hold the power to overturn it. He declares to his fellow citizens:

“You are but a single individual. How can you possible make any difference? Individuals have no power in this modern world. That is what you’ve been taught because that is what they need you to believe. But it is not true. This is why they are afraid and the reason that I am here: to remind you that it is individuals who always hold the power. The real power. Individuals like me. And individuals like you.”

On June 14, 2010, eight days after Khaled Said’s killing at the hands of two officers, a short film, “Khaled for Vendetta,” was uploaded to YouTube with links to it on the Facebook page. A second film, “Khaled Vendetta,” followed on July 29, 2010.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
The five-minute film “Khaled for Vendetta,” written and directed by Mohamed Elm elhoda (Matrix2008 studio), masterfully draws out the parallels between the totalitarian society in V for Vendetta and Egypt under Emergency Law.

The film opens with ominous music from V for Vendetta followed by a fade in and out of Khaled’s image over a black backdrop. The shot cuts to the Peoples Assembly (Majlis al-Sha`ab) session of May 11, 2010, with the then Prime Minister, Ahmed Nazif, announcing the renewal of Emergency Law for two more years. He declares it will be used only to confront drugs and terrorism. Members of parliament applaud. The words “drugs and terrorism” are repeated over and over.

V sets down the first domino.

The next scene opens with a homemade film of a smiling Khaled in what appears to be his bedroom, followed by the now infamous photo taken at the morgue of his mangled face. A text states that Khaled Said was beaten by two plainclothes police under the auspices of the Emergency Law.

The masked man stacks more dominos.

The shot moves to a scene from the original film, a conversation between two police investigators about how everything is connected:

Finch: I suddenly had this feeling that everything was connected. It was like I could see the whole thing; one long chain of events that stretched back […]. I felt like I could see everything that had happened, and everything that was going to happen. It was like a perfect pattern laid out in front of me and I realized that we were all part of it, and all trapped by it.

Dominic: So do you know what’s gonna happen?

Finch: No. It was a feeling. But I can guess. With so much chaos, someone will do something stupid. And when they do, things will turn nasty. And then, Sutler [the leader] will be forced do the only thing he knows how to do. At which point, all V needs to do is keep his word. And then . . .

In the meantime V is setting up an elaborate pattern of dominos in the shape of an encircled “V.” He flicks the first domino and it sets off scenes of violence, chaos, destruction, fire, protests, shouting, upheaval.

The film ends with two still images. The first is of police in disproportionate numbers surrounding a small group of demonstrators. The second and final image is of the people outnumbering and surrounding the police. This closing image no doubt conveys the famous dictum from the film, “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”

In June of 2010, after the film was uploaded, a handful of viewers posted comments which are revealing of the movement within a movement.

“Brilliant video . . . Maybe Dr.El Baradei will be our “v” here in Egypt to save? us . . . I recommend this movie for everyone, it is like a mirror to the current situation here in Egypt . . . God bless you”

“Beneath this mask there is more? than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Adly, and ideas are bulletproof.”

“It brought the tears to my eyes? I can see it all coming soon isa? [inshaallah] it’s not khaled for vendetta anymore . . . it’s? Egypt for vendetta thnx mohamed for that awesome video”

With the fall of Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali on January 14, 2011, an image that immediately started circulating on Facebook was that of a masked man in the foreground of Tunisia’s flag. As Egyptians prepared for their own revolution, the simple image of the masked V made the rounds.

Image posted on Facebook

The appearance of this mask signaled that shebab al-Facebook were becoming restless. Their strategy of silence, even a deafening silence, was perceived as no longer enough to achieve the kind of political change they anxiously desired. And change they got.

In this post-revolution, post-Mubarak period, the mask and spirit of V have been more of less dormant. If events take a turn for the worse, if the crackdown from the military becomes unbearable or a dreaded counterrevolution occurs, V may very well resurface. But for now this seems unlikely, as youth are working in coalitions to develop civil political strategies to meet the changing circumstances. They are making some inroads as they press for democratic change, for working towards the realization of a society that affords people dignity and livelihoods. Yet so much remains unclear. What is certain is that the idea for change has been firmly planted and cannot be eradicated. Ideas after all, as V proclaims, are bulletproof. The struggle continues.

[1] See, for instance, articles about the influence of Gene Sharp in the revolution and articles about the Arabic translation of a comic book about Martin Luther King and strategies of non violence.

[2] For more on the silent stands see the excellent articles by Nadine Wahab and Adel Iskandar.

Linda Herrera is a social anthropologist with expertise in comparative and international education. She has lived in Egypt and conducted research on youth cultures and educational change in Egypt and the wider Middle East for over two decades. She is currently Associate Professor, Department of Education Policy, Organization and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is co-editor with A. Bayat of the volume Being Young and Muslim: New Cultural Politics in the Global North and South, published by Oxford University Press (2010).

This is article also appears on Jadaliyya.com. Other articles by Linda Herrera on Closer are:
Two Faces of Revolution
Egypt’s Revolution 2.0 – The Facebook Factor

1 comment.

Discriminatie, activisme en het alledaagse

Posted on June 2nd, 2011 by martijn.
Categories: Multiculti Issues.

Er was eens een nep-taxichauffeur met een dikke mercedes die fotograaf Schlijper niet mee wilde nemen en hem in plaats daarvan uitschold en hem de middelvinger gaf toen hij langs liep. En hij discrimineerde Schlijper. Hoe hij dat weet? Nou, Schlijper bleef natuurlijk vriendelijk, maar chauffeur bleef hufterig  (dat gebeurt normaal nooit in Amsterdam). Maar opeens wist hij het.

De dikke mocro-chauffeur is kennelijk een Jodenhater. Zo voelt t dus om Jood te zijn in #Amsterdam in 2011

Natuurlijk. Geen twijfel mogelijk want Schlijper had een Hebreeuwse tekst op zijn t-shirt staan. Dat is ook simpel toch? Een dikke Marokkaan  is moslim en islam is anti-semitisch en een moslim dus ook. De logica van de kroeg zeg maar waarbij gelukkig de reaguurders wat kritischer zijn.

Marck Burema nam het natuurlijk gelijk voor hem op. Een dag later nam hij klakkeloos het berichtje van Schlijper over.

Nee, neem dan die Marokkaans-Nederlandse dame die voor de zoveelste keer geweigerd werd door de buschauffeur. Discriminatie luidt hier het oordeel van de buspassagier (althans dat had ze moeten zijn). De gretigheid waarmee GS en cs. sprongen op de zaak Schlijper zien we nu ook weer, maar dan om af te wijzen dat het gaat om discriminatie. Er is geen enkel bewijs en alleen omdat zij het zegt is niet genoeg. En ach het is oud nieuws. En het interesseert ons eigenlijk geen fuck. (Toegegeven, Schlijper zelf is in ieder geval consequenter dan de GS redactie).

In de Volkskrant van vandaag staat een stuk van Lamyae Aharouay die uitgaat van het waarheidsgehalte van de Marokkaanse-Nederlandse vrouw in het busverhaal en aangeeft dat ze er ziek van wordt dat dit soort dingen gebeuren in het land dat ze beschouwd als het hare. Ze roept op tot verontwaardiging. Daarmee legt ze eigenlijk de vinger op de zere plek. Iets waar Ouafa gisteren in een blog ook al op wees is namelijk dat de verontwaardiging niet van de lucht is als Marokkaans-Nederlandse jongeren weer eens wat uitvreten. Soms zwaar overdreven, soms terecht, maar waar het om gaat is dat berichtjes met Marokkaans-Nederlandse jongens als dader heel goed werken als boosmakertjes en berichten met Marokkaans-Nederlandse vrouwen als (terecht of onterecht) slachtoffer vooral weggewuifd worden, gebagatelliseerd of een hoog ‘eigen schuld dikke bult’ gehalte in reacties oproepen waarbij vrouwen met hoofddoek nogal eens gereduceerd worden tot ‘hoofddoekjes‘. Lees bijvoorbeeld de reacties op het artikel van Lamyae er maar op na. Tenzij natuurlijk de dader een moslim is zoals in het geval van Katya Koren. Dan is (zie link) de Telegraaf er als de bliksem bij om een volstrekt ongeloofwaardig bericht van de Daily Mail over te nemen. Het was ook heel erg hoor de zaak van Katya Koren. Vooral omdat ze mooi was natuurlijk; als ze dat niet was had de Telegraaf er dan geen aandacht aan besteed? Misschien toch wel want steniging roept natuurlijk de angst voor sharia op. En de dader zou het zo rechtvaardigen. Onzin blijkt, want behalve dat ze geen moslim is wilde de dader haar ‘gewoon’ vermoorden zo blijkt uit andere berichten. Op z’n minst tegenstrijdige berichten dus.

De stukken van Ouafa, maar vooral Lamyae, geven goed weer hoe eigenlijk alledaagse beslommeringen over identiteit wel tot discussie kunnen leiden maar niet tot grote problemen. Maar ook hoe mensen die zich op en top Nederlander voelen juist door hun identificatie met Nederland, die nauw verbonden is met hun leven van alledag, geraakt kunnen worden door ervaringen van discriminatie. Niet eens door discriminatie op zich dus (hoewel ook dat behoorlijk confronterend kan zijn), maar doordat zij ervaren dat er een gebrek aan reactie is en omdat er in hun ogen niemand is die stelt ‘tot hier en niet verder’. De reactie van Schlijper is eigenlijk ook op die manier te zien; het zijn alledaagse frustraties die gemaakt worden tot een publieke rel. Aangezien de laatste tot de incrowd lijkt te horen van ‘weldenkend Nederland’ komt het ook op GS; Ouafa dient een eigen blog in het leven te roepen en ook Lamyae kreeg geen toegang tot GS, maar wel tot plaatste het direct op de opiniepagina van de Volkskrant. Ieders eigen verhaal krijgt daarin een logica mee die past in een groter en structureel verhaal: het islam- en integratie debat.

Misschien was er in het geval van de buspassagiere in spé helemaal geen sprake van discriminatie, misschien ook wel. Misschien was er in het geval van Schlijper geen sprake van anti-semitisme, misschien ook wel. Ik vraag me serieus (en niet retorisch bedoeld) af of het eigenlijk wel iets uitmaakt. Of Marokkaanse Nederlanders intussen zo murw zijn geworden van het voortdurende hufterige islam- en integratiedebat en de jongens die (mede in reactie daarop wellicht) het voortdurend verpesten, dat men inderdaad alleen nog maar kan vragen om een reactie en niet meer om actie. En ik vraag me eveneens serieus af of discriminatie door autochtone niet-moslim Nederlanders alleen nog maar gebruikt wordt om een punt te scoren in datzelfde debat over Marokkaanse Nederlanders of om hun oprechte frustraties te uiten over integratie en dergelijke. Van een serieuze aanpak van xenofobie, anti-semitisme, islamofobie en homofobie is in Nederland geen sprake. Het is dan ook geen wonder dat ik zowel uit Joodse, homo- en moslim kringen de vraag hoor of het politici eigenlijk wel iets kan schelen.

1 comment.